Cited 0 times in

Stone-Free Rates of mPCNL, PCNL, and RIRS: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author이주용-
dc.contributor.author조강수-
dc.date.accessioned2022-12-22T01:45:17Z-
dc.date.available2022-12-22T01:45:17Z-
dc.date.issued2022-04-
dc.identifier.issn2465-8243-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/191329-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) are performed to treat renal stones, and miniature PCNL (mPCNL) is used as an alternative to conventional PCNL. We conducted a systematic review of published studies regarding RIRS, PCNL, and mPCNL and performed network meta-analysis on successful outcome (stone-free) rates. Materials and Methods: The PubMed and EMBASE databases were searched up to December 2020. Data extraction formats were used to extract data on successful outcome rates, study designs, numbers of subjects and characteristics, and methods used to treat renal stones (i.e., RIRS, PCNL, or mPCNL). Results: Data obtained by 25 studies were used to compare the stone-free rates of RIRS, PCNL, and mPCNL; six comparisons of PCNL and mPCNL, seven of mPCNL and RIRS, and 12 of RIRS and PCNL were analyzed. No difference was found between the stone-free rates of PCNL and mPCNL (odds ratio [OR]: 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-1.9) by network meta-analysis. However, the stone-free rate of RIRS was lower than that of mPCNL (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.021-0.82) and PCNL (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.22-0.82). Ranking analysis ranked mPCNL as No. 1 and PCNL as No. 2. Conclusions: PCNL and mPCNL had better stone-free rates than RIRS for the treatment of renal stones, but the treatment outcomes of PCNL and mPCNL were no different.-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityopen-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.publisherKorean Association of Urogenital Tract Infection and Inflammation-
dc.relation.isPartOfUrogenital Tract Infection-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.titleStone-Free Rates of mPCNL, PCNL, and RIRS: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Urology (비뇨의학교실)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDong Hyuk Kang-
dc.contributor.googleauthorKang Su Cho-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDoo Yong Chung-
dc.contributor.googleauthorWon Sik Jeong-
dc.contributor.googleauthorHae Do Jung-
dc.contributor.googleauthorDo Kyung Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJoo Yong Lee-
dc.identifier.doi10.14777/uti.2022.17.1.14-
dc.contributor.localIdA03161-
dc.contributor.localIdA03801-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ04128-
dc.identifier.eissn2465-8510-
dc.subject.keywordUreteroscopy-
dc.subject.keywordNephrostomy, Percutaneous-
dc.subject.keywordMeta-Analysis-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameLee, Joo Yong-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor이주용-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor조강수-
dc.citation.volume17-
dc.citation.number1-
dc.citation.startPage14-
dc.citation.endPage25-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationUrogenital Tract Infection, Vol.17(1) : 14-25, 2022-04-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Urology (비뇨의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.