Comparison of external stents and DJ stents techniques for pediatric pyeloplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Chunyang Meng; Lijian Gan; Kangsen Li; Lei Peng; Jinze Li; Junbao Yang; Yunxiang Li

doi:10.3389/fped.2022.933845

Comparison of external stents and DJ stents techniques for pediatric pyeloplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Front Pediatr. 2022 Aug 25:10:933845. doi: 10.3389/fped.2022.933845. eCollection 2022.

Authors

Chunyang Meng¹, Lijian Gan¹, Kangsen Li¹, Lei Peng², Jinze Li³, Junbao Yang⁴, Yunxiang Li¹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Urology, The Affiliated Nanchong Central Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
² Department of Urology, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University Medical School, Lanzhou, China.
³ Department of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
⁴ Department of Medical Genetics and Cell Biology, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety between an external stent and a Double J stent for pediatric Pyeloplasty.

Methods: Through a systematical search of multiple scientific databases in July 2022, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the primary outcomes of interest according to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), whose protocol was registered with PROSPERO(CRD42021274087).

Results: Eleven studies involving 1,758 patients were included. No significant differences were observed in operative time (MD: 2.26; 95% CI -9.62 to 14.14; P = 0.79), operative success rate (OR: 1.10; 95% CI 0.57 to 2.10; P = 0.780), length of hospital stay (MD: 0.65; 95% CI -0.04 to 1.34; P = 0.063), or complications (OR: 0.87; 95%CI 0.48 to 1.56; P = 0.630) between external stents and DJ stents in pediatric pyeloplasty. According to the subgroup analysis, we found the external stent group had a shorter operative time than the DJ stent group in terms of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (MD: -17.13; 95% CI -32.8 to -1.45; P = 0.032).

Conclusions: There were no significant differences in operative time, operative success rate, length of hospital stay, or complications between external stents and DJ stents in pediatric pyeloplasty. The external stented procedure seemed to have less operative time when using robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty. However, due to the limitations of our analysis, more studies are still required to support our conclusion.

Systematic review registration: This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO, the registration ID is CRD42021274087.

Keywords: Double J; UPJO; external stent; meta-analysis; pediatric pyeloplasty.