These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of Holmium: YAG Laser and Pneumatic Lithotripsy in the Treatment of Ureteral Stones: An Update Meta-Analysis.
    Author: Chen S, Zhou L, Wei T, Luo D, Jin T, Li H, Wang K.
    Journal: Urol Int; 2017; 98(2):125-133. PubMed ID: 27505176.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: Holmium YAG laser lithotripsy (LL) and pneumatic lithotripsy (PL) are the most commonly used procedures in the treatment of ureteral calculi. In a previous meta-analysis examining the treatment effect of the 2 modalities, the authors highlighted the need for large sample size and high quality trials to provide more uncovered outcome. Recently, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the same issue with larger patient number and more complicated data have been published. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to update and synthesize evidence on the efficacy and safety of the 2 procedures in the treatment of ureteral calculi. METHODS: The relevant studies were identified by searching Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library Database from January 1990 to November 2015. RCTs assessing the efficacy and safety of Holmium YAG laser and PL for ureteral stones were included. Two reviewers independently screened studies and extracted data. RESULTS: A total of 8 studies were identified including 1,555 patients. Compared with PL, Holmium YAG LL significantly reduced the mean operative time (weighted mean difference = -11.52, 95% CI -17.06 to -5.99, p < 0.0001) and increased the early stone-free rate (OR 2.69, 95% CI 1.91-3.78, p < 0.00001) and the delayed stone-free rate (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.40-3.21, p = 0.0004). However, a higher postoperative ureteral stricture rate (OR 3.38, 95% CI 1.56-7.31, p = 0.002) was observed in LL group over PL group. There was no statistical significance in the ureteral perforation rate (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.65-2.16, p = 0.58), the stone migration rate (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41-1.00, p = 0.05), the postoperative gross hematuria rate (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.40-1.25, p = 0.23) and the postoperative fever rate (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.50-1.09, p = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Our data reconfirmed that Holmium LL for ureteral stones can achieve shorter mean operative time, better early and delayed stone-free rate with larger sample size and more high quality studies. And further trials are unlikely to considerably alter this conclusion. In terms of higher risk of postoperative ureteral stricture in LL group over PL group observed in our review, more high quality, multicenter RCTs with long-term follow-up outcome are warranted to better assess this issue.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]