Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) versus ureteroscopic management for ureteric calculi

被引:84
作者
Aboumarzouk, Omar M. [2 ]
Kata, Slawomir G. [3 ]
Keeley, Francis X. [4 ]
McClinton, Samuel [5 ]
Nabi, Ghulam [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Dundee, Coll Med Dent & Nursing, Ctr Acad Clin Practice, Clin & Populat Sci & Educ Div, Dundee DD1 9SY, Scotland
[2] E Scotland Deanery, Dept Urol, Aberdeen, Scotland
[3] Univ Dundee, Ninewells Hosp & Med Sch, Dept Urol, Dundee DD1 9SY, Scotland
[4] Southmead Hosp, Bristol Urol Inst, Bristol, Avon, England
[5] Aberdeen Royal Infirm, Dept Urol, Ward 44, Aberdeen, Scotland
来源
COCHRANE DATABASE OF SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS | 2012年 / 05期
关键词
Lithotripsy [adverse effects; methods; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Ureteral Calculi [therapy; Ureteroscopy [adverse effects; Adult; Humans; LASER LITHOTRIPSY; SEMIRIGID URETERORENOSCOPE; PROXIMAL URETER; STONES; HOLMIUM; PREDICTION; EFFICACY; THERAPY; FAILURE; OPTIONS;
D O I
10.1002/14651858.CD006029.pub4
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
100201 [内科学];
摘要
Background Ureteral stones frequently cause renal colic, and if left untreated, can lead to obstructive uropathy. Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopy, with or without intracorporeal lithotripsy, are the most common interventions used to treat ureteral stones. ESWL treatment is less invasive than ureteroscopy, but has some limitations such as a high retreatment rate, and is not available in all centres. Recent advances in ureteroscopy have increased success rates and reduced complication rates. Objectives To examine evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on the outcomes of ESWL or ureteroscopy in the treatment of ureteric calculi. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL in The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2011), EMBASE (1980 to March 2011), CINAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar, reference lists of articles and abstracts from conference proceedings, all without language restriction. Selection criteria RCTs that compared ESWL with ureteroscopic retrieval of ureteric stones were included in this review. Study participants were adults with ureteric stones requiring intervention. Published and unpublished sources were considered for inclusion. Data collection and analysis Three authors independently assessed study quality, risk of bias, and extracted data. Statistical analyses were performed using the random-effects model. Results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous outcomes or mean differences (MD) for continuous data, both with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results Seven RCTs (1205 patients) were included in the review. Stone-free rates were lower in patients who underwent ESWL (7 studies, 1205 participants: RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.96) but re-treatment rates were lower in ureteroscopy patients (6 studies, 1049 participants: RR 6.18, 95% CI 3.68 to 10.38. ESWL-treated patients had less need for auxiliary treatment (5 studies, 751 participants: RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.74; fewer complications (7 studies, 1205 participants: RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.88); and shorter length of hospital stay (2 studies, 198 participants: MD -2.55 days, 95% CI -3.24 to -1.86). Three studies adequately described the randomisation sequence, three studies were unclear on how they randomised, while one study had a high risk of selection bias. All the studies had an unclear risk of performance bias and detection bias, while all had a low risk of attrition bias, reporting bias, or other sources of bias identified. Authors' conclusions Compared with ESWL, ureteroscopic removal of ureteral stones achieves a greater stone-free state, but with a higher complication rate and longer hospital stay.
引用
收藏
页数:46
相关论文
共 53 条
[1]
Andankar M G, 2001, J Postgrad Med, V47, P177
[2]
OPTIMAL THERAPY FOR THE DISTAL URETERAL STONE - EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK-WAVE LITHOTRIPSY VERSUS URETEROSCOPY [J].
ANDERSON, KR ;
KEETCH, DW ;
ALBALA, DM ;
CHANDHOKE, PS ;
MCCLENNAN, BL ;
CLAYMAN, RV .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1994, 152 (01) :62-65
[3]
[Anonymous], 2010, SURGERY, DOI DOI 10.1016/J.SURG.2009.06.030
[4]
Argyropoulos AN, 2010, J CLIN UROL, V3, P65, DOI 10.1016/j.bjmsu.2010.01.002
[5]
Treatment of ureteric lithiasis with retrograde ureteroscopy and holmium:YAG laser lithotripsy vs extracorporeal lithotripsy [J].
Arrabal-Polo, Miguel A. ;
Arrabal-Martin, Miguel ;
Mijan-Ortiz, Jose L. ;
Valle-Diaz, Francisco ;
Lopez-Leon, Victor ;
Merino-Salas, Sergio ;
Zuluaga-Gomez, Armando .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2009, 104 (08) :1144-1147
[6]
Bierkens AF, 1998, BRIT J UROL, V81, P31
[7]
Treatment of lower ureteral stones:: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy or intracorporeal lithotripsy? [J].
Biri, H ;
Küpeli, B ;
Isen, K ;
Sinik, Z ;
Karaoglan, U ;
Bozkirli, I .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 1999, 13 (02) :77-81
[8]
URETEROSCOPIC TREATMENT OF LOWER URETERAL CALCULI IN THE ERA OF EXTRACORPOREAL SHOCK-WAVE LITHOTRIPSY - FROM A DEVELOPING-COUNTRY POINT-OF-VIEW [J].
CHANG, SC ;
HO, CM ;
KUO, HC .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 1993, 150 (05) :1395-1398
[9]
MEDICAL PROGRESS - THE PATHOGENESIS AND TREATMENT OF KIDNEY-STONES [J].
COE, FL ;
PARKS, JH ;
ASPLIN, JR .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1992, 327 (16) :1141-1152
[10]
Independent predictors of failure of shockwave lithotripsy for ureteral stones employing a second-generation lithotripter [J].
Delakas, D ;
Karyotis, I ;
Daskalopoulos, G ;
Lianos, E ;
Mavromanolakis, E .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2003, 17 (04) :201-205