Effectiveness And Safety Of Flexible Ureteroscope And Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy For Patients With Renal Calculus(Diameter <2cm) :A Meta Analysis

Objective:To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of flexible ureteroscope lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy lithotripsy for patients with renal calculus(diameter <2cm) by the method of neta-analysis.Methods:We searched Pubmed, Ovid, Springer,ScienceDirect, Wiley Online Library, The Cochrane Library,CBM, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang Database, a comprehensive collection of the relevant flexible ureteroscope and percutaneous nephrolithotomy treatment of renal calculus compare controlled clinical trials. The methodological quality by two independent researchers screened the literature, data extraction and evaluation of the included studies, using pieces into RevMan 5.2 software line meta-analysis.Results:11 studies were included, a total of 1060 cases of patients. meta-analysis showed that: PCNL was better than FURS in stone clearance rate [OR = 0.44,95% CI(0.29,0.67), P = 0.0001], whereas FURS was better than PCNL in bleeding [MD =-72.78,95% CI(-80.77,-64.79), P <0.00001], the average decline in the amount of hemoglobin [MD =-0.90,95 % CI(-1.41,0.40), P = 0.0005], whether blood transfusion [OR = 0.07,95% CI(0.02,0.27), P = 0.0002]; No significant difference in postoperative adverse reactions between the two methods of operation,The total postoperative adverse reaction [OR = 0.74,95% CI(0.32,1.73), P = 0.49],postoperative fever [OR = 0.71,95% CI(0.18,2.77), P = 0.62], postoperative urinary leakage [OR = 0.54,95% CI(0.02,12.52), P = 0.70].Conclusion:The available evidence shows that percutaneous nephrolithotomy was better than flexible ureteroscope in the stone clearance rate to treat renal calculus(diameter less than 2cm),in the blood loss,flexible ureteroscope less than percutaneous nephrolithotomy.