Prophylactic ureteric catheterisation during complex gynaecological surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Author:

Gurumurthy Mahalakshmi1ORCID,McGee Alice E.2,Saraswat Lucky1

Affiliation:

1. Aberdeen Royal Infirmary Aberdeen UK

2. Aberdeen Centre for Women's Health Research Aberdeen UK

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThere is a lack of robust evidence to recommend the use of perioperative ureteric catheterisation or stenting in complex gynaecological surgery.ObjectivesTo evaluate the evidence on the benefits and risks of perioperative ureteric catheterisation or stenting in complex gynaecological surgery.Search strategyA literature search was performed in CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Embase and MEDLINE, from 1946 to January 2024, using a combination of keywords and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terminology.Selection criteriaRandomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were included.Data collection and analysisMeta‐analysis of the RCTs and observational studies were performed separately. Cochrane RevMan 6.5.1 was used to undertake meta‐analysis. Risk ratios with 95% CIs were calculated for the outcome measures.Main resultsTen studies were included: three RCTs and seven observational studies, comprising 8661 patients. The three RCTs, comprising a total of 3277 patients, showed no difference in the risk of immediate complications in the form of ureteric injury between the ureteric stent and the control groups (RR 0.9, 95% CI 0.49–1.65). The observational studies included 5384 patients. Four studies that explored the ureteric injury as an outcome did not show any difference between the two groups (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.27–2.16). One case–control study with 862 participants found that the rate of ureteric injury was higher in the non‐stented group, although this was observed in only three patients. The risk of urinary tract infection (UTI) was increased in the stent group, although not with statistical significance (RR 1.84, 95% CI 0.47–7.17). There was no significant difference in the risk of ureteric fistulae (RR 1.91, 95% CI 0.62–5.83), although the number of studies was limited.ConclusionsProphylactic ureteric catheterisation or stenting for complex gynaecological surgery is not associated with a lower risk of ureteric injury.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3