Outcomes of stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To investigate the potential beneficial and adverse effects of routine ureteric stent placement after ureteroscopy.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sources Cochrane controlled trials register (2006 issue 2), Embase, and Medline (1966 to 31 Mar...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMJ 2007-03, Vol.334 (7593), p.572-575
Hauptverfasser: Nabi, Ghulam, Cook, J, N'Dow, J, McClinton, S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 575
container_issue 7593
container_start_page 572
container_title BMJ
container_volume 334
creator Nabi, Ghulam
Cook, J
N'Dow, J
McClinton, S
description Objective To investigate the potential beneficial and adverse effects of routine ureteric stent placement after ureteroscopy.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sources Cochrane controlled trials register (2006 issue 2), Embase, and Medline (1966 to 31 March 2006), without language restrictions.Review methods We included all randomised controlled trials that reported various outcomes with or without stenting after ureteroscopy. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality. Meta-analyses used both fixed and random effects models with dichotomous data reported as relative risk and continuous data as a weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals.Results Nine randomised controlled trials (reporting 831 participants) were identified. The incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms was significantly higher in participants who had a stent inserted (relative risk 2.25, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 4.43, for dysuria; 2.00, 1.11 to 3.62, for frequency or urgency) after ureteroscopy. There was no significant difference in postoperative requirement for analgesia, urinary tract infections, stone free rate, and ureteric strictures in the two groups. Because of marked heterogeneity, formal pooling of data was not possible for some outcomes such as flank pain. A pooled analysis showed a reduced likelihood of unplanned medical visits or admission to hospital in the group with stents (0.53, 0.17 to 1.60), although this difference was not significant. None of the trials reported on health related quality of life. Cost reported in three randomised controlled trials favoured the group without stents. The overall quality of trials was poor and reporting of outcomes inconsistent.Conclusions Patients with stents after ureteroscopy have significantly higher morbidity in the form of irritative lower urinary symptoms with no influence on stone free rate, rate of urinary tract infection, requirement for analgesia, or long term ureteric stricture formation. Because of the marked heterogeneity and poor quality of reporting of the included trials, the place of stenting in the management of patients after uncomplicated ureteroscopy remains unclear.
doi_str_mv 10.1136/bmj.39119.595081.55
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1828345</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>20506662</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>20506662</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b684t-7f8f924d8fe7992ca87c7798dfafd7935e427d1049b6a94521dc556d5888d4483</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkkuLFDEUhQtRnGacXyBKoeiuyrxz40KQHh2F0dn4gN6EdCo1pq1Hm1TN2P_elNX0qCC6CuR8ueSce7LsPkYlxlQ8W7ebkiqMVckVR4BLzm9lC8wEFBwovZ0tkOKqAEzhKDuJcYMQIlSCEvxudoQlxRg4XmSri3Gwfeti3td5HFw3-O4yN_XgQj52Sdk23prBVfkYXLrso-23u-d53CW4NYO3eXBX3l3npqvy1g2mMJ1pdtHHe9md2jTRnezP4-zj61cflm-K84uzt8uX58VaABsKWUOtCKugdlIpYg1IK6WCqjZ1JRXljhFZYcTUWhjFOMGV5VxUHAAqxoAeZy_mudtx3brKJg_BNHobfGvCTvfG69-Vzn_Rl_2VxkCAMp4GPN0PCP230cVBtz5a1zSmc_0YtUREKMDknyCXWAmsVAIf_QFu-jGkXKImiCGsQNAEPf4bhKWcskCSJYrOlE3Zx-DqgzGM9FQFnaqgf1ZBz1XQfLL08NdMbt7sF5-AJ3vARGuaOpjO-njDgUBEAUrcg5nbxKEPB50gjoQQUyTFrPvUh-8H3YSvWkgquX7_aalPV8vV53dnRE_LKmd--vX_OPkBNTbkCw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1777992074</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Outcomes of stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>BMJ Journals - NESLi2</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Nabi, Ghulam ; Cook, J ; N'Dow, J ; McClinton, S</creator><creatorcontrib>Nabi, Ghulam ; Cook, J ; N'Dow, J ; McClinton, S</creatorcontrib><description>Objective To investigate the potential beneficial and adverse effects of routine ureteric stent placement after ureteroscopy.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sources Cochrane controlled trials register (2006 issue 2), Embase, and Medline (1966 to 31 March 2006), without language restrictions.Review methods We included all randomised controlled trials that reported various outcomes with or without stenting after ureteroscopy. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality. Meta-analyses used both fixed and random effects models with dichotomous data reported as relative risk and continuous data as a weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals.Results Nine randomised controlled trials (reporting 831 participants) were identified. The incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms was significantly higher in participants who had a stent inserted (relative risk 2.25, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 4.43, for dysuria; 2.00, 1.11 to 3.62, for frequency or urgency) after ureteroscopy. There was no significant difference in postoperative requirement for analgesia, urinary tract infections, stone free rate, and ureteric strictures in the two groups. Because of marked heterogeneity, formal pooling of data was not possible for some outcomes such as flank pain. A pooled analysis showed a reduced likelihood of unplanned medical visits or admission to hospital in the group with stents (0.53, 0.17 to 1.60), although this difference was not significant. None of the trials reported on health related quality of life. Cost reported in three randomised controlled trials favoured the group without stents. The overall quality of trials was poor and reporting of outcomes inconsistent.Conclusions Patients with stents after ureteroscopy have significantly higher morbidity in the form of irritative lower urinary symptoms with no influence on stone free rate, rate of urinary tract infection, requirement for analgesia, or long term ureteric stricture formation. Because of the marked heterogeneity and poor quality of reporting of the included trials, the place of stenting in the management of patients after uncomplicated ureteroscopy remains unclear.</description><edition>International edition</edition><identifier>ISSN: 0959-8138</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0959-8146</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 0959-535X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1468-5833</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1756-1833</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39119.595081.55</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17311851</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BMJOAE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: British Medical Journal Publishing Group</publisher><subject>Analgesia ; Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical outcomes ; Clinical trials ; Confidence intervals ; Diagnostic testing ; Diseases of the cardiovascular system ; Experimentation ; General aspects ; Health outcomes ; Hematuria - etiology ; Hospital admissions ; Hospitals ; Humans ; Lithotripsy ; Medical sciences ; Medical technology ; Meta-analysis ; Outcomes ; Pain ; Pain Measurement ; Pain, Postoperative - etiology ; Quality of Life ; Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects) ; Randomized controlled trials ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Stents ; Stents - adverse effects ; Stents - standards ; Strictures ; Studies ; Symptoms ; Ureteral Calculi - surgery ; Ureteral Obstruction - surgery ; Ureteroscopy - adverse effects ; Urinary Catheterization - adverse effects ; Urinary Retention - etiology ; Urinary tract ; Urinary tract diseases ; Urogenital system</subject><ispartof>BMJ, 2007-03, Vol.334 (7593), p.572-575</ispartof><rights>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2007</rights><rights>Copyright 2007 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.</rights><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright: 2007 (c) BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2007</rights><rights>Copyright BMJ Publishing Group Mar 17, 2007</rights><rights>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd 2007 2007 BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b684t-7f8f924d8fe7992ca87c7798dfafd7935e427d1049b6a94521dc556d5888d4483</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttp://bmj.com/content/334/7593/572.full.pdf$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttp://bmj.com/content/334/7593/572.full$$EHTML$$P50$$Gbmj$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>114,115,230,314,776,780,799,881,3182,23551,27903,27904,30978,30979,57995,58228,77346,77377</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=18602980$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17311851$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nabi, Ghulam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cook, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>N'Dow, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McClinton, S</creatorcontrib><title>Outcomes of stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>BMJ</title><addtitle>BMJ</addtitle><description>Objective To investigate the potential beneficial and adverse effects of routine ureteric stent placement after ureteroscopy.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sources Cochrane controlled trials register (2006 issue 2), Embase, and Medline (1966 to 31 March 2006), without language restrictions.Review methods We included all randomised controlled trials that reported various outcomes with or without stenting after ureteroscopy. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality. Meta-analyses used both fixed and random effects models with dichotomous data reported as relative risk and continuous data as a weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals.Results Nine randomised controlled trials (reporting 831 participants) were identified. The incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms was significantly higher in participants who had a stent inserted (relative risk 2.25, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 4.43, for dysuria; 2.00, 1.11 to 3.62, for frequency or urgency) after ureteroscopy. There was no significant difference in postoperative requirement for analgesia, urinary tract infections, stone free rate, and ureteric strictures in the two groups. Because of marked heterogeneity, formal pooling of data was not possible for some outcomes such as flank pain. A pooled analysis showed a reduced likelihood of unplanned medical visits or admission to hospital in the group with stents (0.53, 0.17 to 1.60), although this difference was not significant. None of the trials reported on health related quality of life. Cost reported in three randomised controlled trials favoured the group without stents. The overall quality of trials was poor and reporting of outcomes inconsistent.Conclusions Patients with stents after ureteroscopy have significantly higher morbidity in the form of irritative lower urinary symptoms with no influence on stone free rate, rate of urinary tract infection, requirement for analgesia, or long term ureteric stricture formation. Because of the marked heterogeneity and poor quality of reporting of the included trials, the place of stenting in the management of patients after uncomplicated ureteroscopy remains unclear.</description><subject>Analgesia</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Diagnostic testing</subject><subject>Diseases of the cardiovascular system</subject><subject>Experimentation</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Health outcomes</subject><subject>Hematuria - etiology</subject><subject>Hospital admissions</subject><subject>Hospitals</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lithotripsy</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Medical technology</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Outcomes</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Pain Measurement</subject><subject>Pain, Postoperative - etiology</subject><subject>Quality of Life</subject><subject>Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects)</subject><subject>Randomized controlled trials</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Stents</subject><subject>Stents - adverse effects</subject><subject>Stents - standards</subject><subject>Strictures</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Symptoms</subject><subject>Ureteral Calculi - surgery</subject><subject>Ureteral Obstruction - surgery</subject><subject>Ureteroscopy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Urinary Catheterization - adverse effects</subject><subject>Urinary Retention - etiology</subject><subject>Urinary tract</subject><subject>Urinary tract diseases</subject><subject>Urogenital system</subject><issn>0959-8138</issn><issn>0959-8146</issn><issn>0959-535X</issn><issn>1468-5833</issn><issn>1756-1833</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkkuLFDEUhQtRnGacXyBKoeiuyrxz40KQHh2F0dn4gN6EdCo1pq1Hm1TN2P_elNX0qCC6CuR8ueSce7LsPkYlxlQ8W7ebkiqMVckVR4BLzm9lC8wEFBwovZ0tkOKqAEzhKDuJcYMQIlSCEvxudoQlxRg4XmSri3Gwfeti3td5HFw3-O4yN_XgQj52Sdk23prBVfkYXLrso-23u-d53CW4NYO3eXBX3l3npqvy1g2mMJ1pdtHHe9md2jTRnezP4-zj61cflm-K84uzt8uX58VaABsKWUOtCKugdlIpYg1IK6WCqjZ1JRXljhFZYcTUWhjFOMGV5VxUHAAqxoAeZy_mudtx3brKJg_BNHobfGvCTvfG69-Vzn_Rl_2VxkCAMp4GPN0PCP230cVBtz5a1zSmc_0YtUREKMDknyCXWAmsVAIf_QFu-jGkXKImiCGsQNAEPf4bhKWcskCSJYrOlE3Zx-DqgzGM9FQFnaqgf1ZBz1XQfLL08NdMbt7sF5-AJ3vARGuaOpjO-njDgUBEAUrcg5nbxKEPB50gjoQQUyTFrPvUh-8H3YSvWkgquX7_aalPV8vV53dnRE_LKmd--vX_OPkBNTbkCw</recordid><startdate>20070317</startdate><enddate>20070317</enddate><creator>Nabi, Ghulam</creator><creator>Cook, J</creator><creator>N'Dow, J</creator><creator>McClinton, S</creator><general>British Medical Journal Publishing Group</general><general>British Medical Association</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group LTD</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group</general><general>BMJ Publishing Group Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BTHHO</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070317</creationdate><title>Outcomes of stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Nabi, Ghulam ; Cook, J ; N'Dow, J ; McClinton, S</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b684t-7f8f924d8fe7992ca87c7798dfafd7935e427d1049b6a94521dc556d5888d4483</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Analgesia</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Diagnostic testing</topic><topic>Diseases of the cardiovascular system</topic><topic>Experimentation</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Health outcomes</topic><topic>Hematuria - etiology</topic><topic>Hospital admissions</topic><topic>Hospitals</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lithotripsy</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Medical technology</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Outcomes</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Pain Measurement</topic><topic>Pain, Postoperative - etiology</topic><topic>Quality of Life</topic><topic>Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects)</topic><topic>Randomized controlled trials</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Stents</topic><topic>Stents - adverse effects</topic><topic>Stents - standards</topic><topic>Strictures</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Symptoms</topic><topic>Ureteral Calculi - surgery</topic><topic>Ureteral Obstruction - surgery</topic><topic>Ureteroscopy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Urinary Catheterization - adverse effects</topic><topic>Urinary Retention - etiology</topic><topic>Urinary tract</topic><topic>Urinary tract diseases</topic><topic>Urogenital system</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nabi, Ghulam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cook, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>N'Dow, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McClinton, S</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>BMJ Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>BMJ</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nabi, Ghulam</au><au>Cook, J</au><au>N'Dow, J</au><au>McClinton, S</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Outcomes of stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>BMJ</jtitle><addtitle>BMJ</addtitle><date>2007-03-17</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>334</volume><issue>7593</issue><spage>572</spage><epage>575</epage><pages>572-575</pages><issn>0959-8138</issn><issn>0959-8146</issn><issn>0959-535X</issn><eissn>1468-5833</eissn><eissn>1756-1833</eissn><coden>BMJOAE</coden><abstract>Objective To investigate the potential beneficial and adverse effects of routine ureteric stent placement after ureteroscopy.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.Data sources Cochrane controlled trials register (2006 issue 2), Embase, and Medline (1966 to 31 March 2006), without language restrictions.Review methods We included all randomised controlled trials that reported various outcomes with or without stenting after ureteroscopy. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality. Meta-analyses used both fixed and random effects models with dichotomous data reported as relative risk and continuous data as a weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals.Results Nine randomised controlled trials (reporting 831 participants) were identified. The incidence of lower urinary tract symptoms was significantly higher in participants who had a stent inserted (relative risk 2.25, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 4.43, for dysuria; 2.00, 1.11 to 3.62, for frequency or urgency) after ureteroscopy. There was no significant difference in postoperative requirement for analgesia, urinary tract infections, stone free rate, and ureteric strictures in the two groups. Because of marked heterogeneity, formal pooling of data was not possible for some outcomes such as flank pain. A pooled analysis showed a reduced likelihood of unplanned medical visits or admission to hospital in the group with stents (0.53, 0.17 to 1.60), although this difference was not significant. None of the trials reported on health related quality of life. Cost reported in three randomised controlled trials favoured the group without stents. The overall quality of trials was poor and reporting of outcomes inconsistent.Conclusions Patients with stents after ureteroscopy have significantly higher morbidity in the form of irritative lower urinary symptoms with no influence on stone free rate, rate of urinary tract infection, requirement for analgesia, or long term ureteric stricture formation. Because of the marked heterogeneity and poor quality of reporting of the included trials, the place of stenting in the management of patients after uncomplicated ureteroscopy remains unclear.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>British Medical Journal Publishing Group</pub><pmid>17311851</pmid><doi>10.1136/bmj.39119.595081.55</doi><tpages>4</tpages><edition>International edition</edition><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0959-8138
ispartof BMJ, 2007-03, Vol.334 (7593), p.572-575
issn 0959-8138
0959-8146
0959-535X
1468-5833
1756-1833
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_1828345
source MEDLINE; BMJ Journals - NESLi2; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); Jstor Complete Legacy; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Analgesia
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical outcomes
Clinical trials
Confidence intervals
Diagnostic testing
Diseases of the cardiovascular system
Experimentation
General aspects
Health outcomes
Hematuria - etiology
Hospital admissions
Hospitals
Humans
Lithotripsy
Medical sciences
Medical technology
Meta-analysis
Outcomes
Pain
Pain Measurement
Pain, Postoperative - etiology
Quality of Life
Radiotherapy. Instrumental treatment. Physiotherapy. Reeducation. Rehabilitation, orthophony, crenotherapy. Diet therapy and various other treatments (general aspects)
Randomized controlled trials
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Stents
Stents - adverse effects
Stents - standards
Strictures
Studies
Symptoms
Ureteral Calculi - surgery
Ureteral Obstruction - surgery
Ureteroscopy - adverse effects
Urinary Catheterization - adverse effects
Urinary Retention - etiology
Urinary tract
Urinary tract diseases
Urogenital system
title Outcomes of stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: systematic review and meta-analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T03%3A48%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Outcomes%20of%20stenting%20after%20uncomplicated%20ureteroscopy:%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=BMJ&rft.au=Nabi,%20Ghulam&rft.date=2007-03-17&rft.volume=334&rft.issue=7593&rft.spage=572&rft.epage=575&rft.pages=572-575&rft.issn=0959-8138&rft.eissn=1468-5833&rft.coden=BMJOAE&rft_id=info:doi/10.1136/bmj.39119.595081.55&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_pubme%3E20506662%3C/jstor_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1777992074&rft_id=info:pmid/17311851&rft_jstor_id=20506662&rfr_iscdi=true