Prestenting Versus Nonprestenting on the Outcomes of Flexible Ureteroscopy for Large Upper Urinary Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Introduction: The purpose of this article is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of prestenting (PS) versus non-PS (NPS) of flexible ureteroscopy (fURS) to treat large upper urinary stones.

Methods: We conducted a systematic literature research of PubMed, Ovid, Scopus (up to August 2019), and citation lists to identify eligible studies. All studies comparing PS versus NPS of fURS were included. Data were analyzed using the Cochrane Collaboration's Review Manager (RevMan) 5.3 software.

Results: Overall, 7 studies including 3,145 patients (PS 1,408; NPS 1,737) were included in this article. PS group was associated with older age (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.91 year; p < 0.001) and more male patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.34; p < 0.001). There were no statistical differences between PS and NPS in BMI (WMD 0.34 kg/m2; p = 0.13), stone size (WMD 0.13 mm; p = 0.77), and operative time (WMD 0.44 min; p = 0.86). Compared with NPS, PS showed better initial success rate (OR 4.04; p < 0.001) and higher SFR (OR 1.64; p < 0.001). There were no statistical differences for complications (OR 0.84; p = 0.42) and Clavien-Dindo score ≥3 complications (OR 1.04; p = 0.93).

Conclusion: PS could improve initial success rate and avoid secondary general anesthesia for first ureteral access sheath failed patients. PS could provide better SFR than NPS in the treatment of large upper urinary stones with fURS.

Keywords: Flexible ureteroscopy; Meta-analysis; Prestenting; Upper urinary stone.