Dyah Ratih Widyokirono, - and Yudhistira Pradnyan Kloping, - and Furqan Hidayatullah, - and Zakaria Aulia Rahman, - and Anthony Chi-Fai Ng, - and Lukman Hakim, Lukman (2021) Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery (ECIRS) Versus Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for Large and Complex Renal Stone: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Endourology, 36 (7). pp. 865-876. ISSN ISSN:0892-7790E-ISSN:1557-900X

	Text (Artikel) 03. Endoscopic Combined.pdf Download (7MB)
	Text (Kualitas Karil & Kesesuaian Bidang Ilmu) 3.pdf Download (788kB)
	Text (Turnitin) 03. Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal.pdf Download (4MB)
	Text (Bukti Korespondensi) 03. Endoscopic Combined Intrarenal Surgery.pdf Download (456kB)

Abstract

Abstract Background: Managing complex and large renal stones with percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is difficult because of the likelihood of residual stones and multiple access. Endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery (ECIRS) is introduced as an improvement to the procedure to manage stones in one session. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy and safety between ECIRS and PCNL for treating large and complex renal stones. Materials and Methods: We conducted a systematic review in the Embase, Scopus, and MEDLINE databases based on the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses guideline. Eligible studies comprised both randomized and nonrandomized studies comparing ECIRS and PCNL. Results: A total of five nonrandomized studies and one randomized controlled trial were included. The analysis was divided into two subgroups based on the PCNL type, a conventional PCNL (cPCNL) and a mini-PCNL (mPCNL). The one-step stone-free rate (SFR) of ECIRS were significantly higher compared with both the cPCNL (odds ratio [OR] 5.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.54 to 10.4, p < 0.001) and mPCNL (OR 4.27, 95% CI 2.57-7.1, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mean operative time and hemoglobin drop between both groups (p > 0.05). The use of auxiliary procedures was significantly higher in both PCNL groups compared with the ECIRS group (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.13-0.30, p < 0.001). The overall complication rate of ECIRS was lower compared with PCNL (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21-0.85, p = 0.02), especially urosepsis, in which the incidence was lower compared with cPCNL (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.78, p = 0.02), but not mPCNL (p > 0.05). Conclusion: ECIRS is an effective and safe treatment particularly for large and complex nephrolithiasis, with significantly higher one-step SFR, a lower necessity for auxiliary procedures, and a lower complication rate compared with PCNL. Keywords: ECIRS; PCNL; endoscopic combined intrarenal surgery; percutaneous nephrolithotomy; renal stone.

Actions (login required)

View Item