Background and objective
Urolithiasis, the presence of stones in the urinary tract, has been linked to various clinical features and reported as a worldwide health concern. Its prevalence varies across different regions as well as populations. Several primary studies have been conducted in Sub-Saharan Africa on the situation. However, their reports are inconsistent. Hence, this review aimed to assess the pooled magnitude of urolithiasis and its clinical patterns among hospital-visiting patients in sub-Saharan Africa.
Methods
Online databases such as PubMed, Hinari, the African Journals online database, and Google Scholar were used to comprehensively search articles published until June 28, 2023, about the prevalence and clinical patterns of urolithiasis in Sub-Saharan Africa. All the included studies were conducted at hospital setting. The retrieved data was exported to STATA version 16 for final analysis. A random-effect meta-analysis model was computed to estimate the pooled results. The heterogeneity of the studies was assessed using
I
2
and Cochran’s Q. Publication bias was examined by observation using funnel plots and statistically by Egger’s tests. Subgroup analysis was performed based on the country where the studies have been conducted.
Result
A total of 26 articles (11 reported both prevalence and clinical pattern, 5 reported only prevalence, and 10 reported only clinical patterns of urolithiasis) were included in the final systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of urolithiasis among hospital-visiting patients was 9.4% (95% CL = 4.9–14%), with significant heterogeneity. Most of the urolithiasis was located in the kidney, with an estimated pooled proportion of 4.6% (95% CI = 2.7, 6.5), followed by bladder stone-2.0% (95% CI = 0.7, 3.4), ureteral stone-1.8% (95% CI = 0.7, 2.9), and urethral stone-0.2% (95% CI = 0.00, 0.05). The subgroup analysis showed the highest prevalence of urolithiasis was found in Mauritian, 28.1% (95%CI 24.5, 31.7), followed by Ethiopia 18.1%, and the lowest was in Eritrea, 1.0%. A sensitivity analysis using the random-effects model found no influential study on the pooled prevalence of urolithiasis. Evidence of significant publication bias was observed and trim-fill analysis was conducted for adjustment. Accordingly, two missing studies were identified, and after adjustment, the combined prevalence of urolithiasis was estimated to be 10.7%. The study also found that urolithiasis prevalence per gender was 6.3% in males and 2.9% in females. The most common clinical presentation of urolithiasis was flank pain at 58.4% (95% CL=, 45.9, 70.8), followed by low back pain at 45.9% (95% CL=, 23.1, 68.8), and nausea/vomiting at 29.9% (95% CI: 1 1.1, 48.8).
Conclusion
The prevalence of urolithiasis in Sub-Sahara African Countries is increasing even though a remarkable regional variation was observed, with higher predominance...
