+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Efficacies of Various Surgical Regimens in the Treatment of Renal Calculi Patients: a Network Meta-Analysis in 25 Enrolled Controlled Clinical Trials

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          Background/Aims: Renal calculi, or kidney stones, are masses made of crystals that affect people of all geographical, cultural, and racial groups. We conduct this study with the aim of comparing the efficacy of various surgical methods in the treatment of renal calculi. Methods: Controlled clinical trials (CCTs) related to different surgical treatment approaches for renal calculi were included in this study by retrieving them from electronic English databases. The odds ratios (OR), the weighted mean difference (WMD), 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) and surface under the cumulative ranking curves (SUCRA) were evaluated, followed by a cluster analysis. Results: Compared with the extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (standard PCNL), ureterorenoscopy (URS) and micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) regimens, the open anatrophic nephrolithotomy (Open AN), URS + RIRS and laparoscopic pyelolithotomy (LP) surgical procedures all presented with a higher stone-free rate in renal calculi. Lower auxiliary procedures were found in the URS + RIRS treatment approach compared with SWL, RIRS, URS and microperc regimens. In addition, the SWL regimen indicated a lower stone-free rate than the mini-PCNL, standard PCNL, Open AN, URS + RIRS and LP regimens. Finally, the RIRS regimen presented with the shortest in-patient stay compared to the mini-PCNL, standard PCNL, Open AN, URS, URS + RIRS and LP regimens. Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrated that the URS + RIRS surgical procedure has the best stone-free rate and the lowest number of auxiliary procedures. The RIRS and Microperc both have the shortest hospital stay and operative time.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Kidney Blood Press Res
          Kidney and Blood Pressure Research
          S. Karger AG
          October 2018
          31 July 2018
          : 43
          : 4
          : 1183-1198
          aDepartment of Urology, the First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
          bThird Operating Room, the First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
          cFirst Operating Room, the First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
          dSecond Operating Room, the First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China
          Author notes
          *Dr. Gang Wang, Second Operating Room, the First Hospital of Jilin University, No. 71, Xinmin Street, Changchun 130021, Jilin Province (China), Tel. +86-0431-88782964, E-Mail 24552504@qq.com
          492246 Kidney Blood Press Res 2018;43:1183–1198
          © 2018 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel

          This article is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND). Usage and distribution for commercial purposes as well as any distribution of modified material requires written permission. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

          Page count
          Figures: 6, Tables: 4, Pages: 16
          Original Paper


          Comment on this article