Show simple item record

Surgical approaches for treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction – a systematic review and network meta-analysis

dc.contributor.authorUhlig, Annemarie
dc.contributor.authorUhlig, Johannes
dc.contributor.authorTrojan, Lutz
dc.contributor.authorHinterthaner, Marc
dc.contributor.authorvon Hammerstein-Equord, Alexander
dc.contributor.authorStrauss, Arne
dc.date.accessioned2019-11-17T04:15:09Z
dc.date.available2019-11-17T04:15:09Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.identifier.urihttp://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/16679
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Multiple surgical treatment options are available for the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). The aim of this study is to compare the most frequently used technics in a comprehensive network approach. Methods A systematic literature search of the EMBASE, MEDLINE and COCHRANE libraries was conducted in January 2018. Publications were included that evaluated at least two of the following surgical techniques: open pyeloplasty (OP), endopyelotomy (EP), laparoscopic (LP) and robot assisted pyeloplasty (RP). Main outcomes were operative success, complications, urinary leakage, re-operation, transfusion rate, operating time, and length of stay. Network meta-analyses with random effects models simultaneously assessed effectiveness of all surgical techniques. Results A total of 26 studies including 3143 patients were analyzed. Compared with RP, EP and LP showed lower operative success rates (EP: OR = 0.09, 95%CI:0.05–0.19; p < 0.001; LP: OR = 0.51, 95%CI:0.31–0.84; p = 0.008). Compared with OP, LP and RP had lower risk for complications (LP: OR = 0.62; 95%CI:0.41–0.95; p = 0.027; RP: OR = 0.41; 95%CI:0.22–0.79; p = 0.007). Compared with RP, no significant differences were detected for urinary leakage or re-operation, transfusion rates. Compared with EP, RP yielded longer operating time (mean = 102.87 min, 95%CI:41.79 min–163.95 min, p = < 0.001). Further significant differences in operating times were detected when comparing LP to EP (mean = 115.13 min, 95%CI:65.63 min–164.63 min, p = < 0.001) and OP to EP (mean = 91.96 min, 95%CI:32.33 min–151.58 min, p = 0.003). Conclusions Multiple surgical techniques are available for treatment of UPJO. RP has the highest rates of operative success and as well as LP lower complication rates than OP. Although surgical outcomes are worse for EP, its operating time is shorter than OP, RP, and LP. Surgeons should consider these findings when selecting the optimal treatment method for individual patients.
dc.description.sponsorshipOpen-Access-Publikationsfonds 2019
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherBioMed Central
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationBMC Urology. 2019 Nov 11;19(1):112
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.titleSurgical approaches for treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction – a systematic review and network meta-analysis
dc.typejournalArticle
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/s12894-019-0544-7
dc.type.versionpublishedVersion
dc.date.updated2019-11-17T04:15:09Z
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).
dc.bibliographicCitation.volume19
dc.bibliographicCitation.issue1
dc.type.subtypejournalArticle
dc.bibliographicCitation.articlenumber112
dc.bibliographicCitation.journalBMC Urology


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record