Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Does the presence or degree of hydronephrosis affect the stone disintegration efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Does the presence or degree of hydronephrosis affect the stone disintegration efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Does the presence or degree of hydronephrosis affect the stone disintegration efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Does the presence or degree of hydronephrosis affect the stone disintegration efficacy of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy? A systematic review and meta-analysis
2020
Overview
The aim of this study was to determine whether the presence or degree of hydronephrosis (HN) affects the stone disintegration efficacy of shock wave lithotripsy (SWL). A comprehensive literature search using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted to retrieve relevant studies. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for comparisons of outcomes of interest. In total, seven comparative studies with 2033 patients were included. Overall results indicated no significant difference in stone-free rate (SFR) and retreatment rate between two groups. Subgroup analysis further revealed: (1) compared with moderate or severe HN, non-HN SWL brought significantly lower retreatment rate (RR 0.67, 95%CI 0.52–0.87, P = 0.002 and RR 0.55, 95%CI: 0.40–0.76, P = 0.0003, respectively) and shorter clearance time (MD − 3.80, 95%CI − 5.81 to − 1.79, P = 0.0002 and MD – 5.93, 95%CI − 10.29 to − 1.57, P = 0.008, respectively); (2) SWLs performed without stone-induced HN or with artificial HN were associated with significantly higher SFR (RR 1.11, 95%CI 1.04−1.18, P = 0.001 and RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.87−0.99, P = 0.02, respectively); (3) non-HN SWL brought significantly higher SFR than HN group when treating proximal ureteral stones (RR 1.14, 95%CI 1.04–1.24, P = 0.005). Generally, SWLs performed with HN were shown to offer similar stone disintegration efficacy to those without HN. However, it seemed preferable to perform SWL: (1) without severe to moderate HN or stone-induced HN; (2) with artificial HN; (3) without HN when treating proximal ureteral stones.
Publisher
Springer Nature B.V
Subject
