Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Introduction Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is widely performed as the preferred treatment for kidney stones larger than 20 mm in pediatric patients, with current research focusing on comparing outcomes between prone and supine positions to determine optimal procedural positioning. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of prone versus supine positioning in pediatric PCNL, providing clarity on this critical aspect of the procedure to guide clinical decision-making. MethodsWe conducted a systematic review in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science and Google Scholar. We included studies that compared PCNL in prone vs supine positions for pediatric patients. Our primary outcome was stone-free rate (SFR). Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay and overall complications rate. The statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4. ResultsWe retrieved 8 articles, with 269 patients in the prone group and 223 patients in the supine group. The mean age of all patients was 7.92 years old. Our findings presented no statistically significant difference in SFR between the two positions (OR 0.67; CI95 0.38, 1.18; p = 0.17; I 2 = 0%). Additionally, we noted a significant reduction in operative time in the supine position group (MD 13.75; CI95 4.35, 23.15; p = 0.004; I 2 = 84%). At the same time, the length of hospital stay after the procedure was lower in supine group (MD 0.61; CI95 0.34, 0.88; p < 0.0001; I 2 = 21%). No difference was observed regarding the total complication rate (OR 1.47; CI95 0.88, 2.47; p = 0.15; I 2 = 0%). ConclusionOur meta-analysis suggests that PCNL performed in the prone position is equivalent to supine PCNL in terms of SFR. However, mainly in the RCT studies, we could observe benefits of the supine position in comparison of prone position in terms of lower operative time, as well as a reduced postoperative hospital stay.
Introduction Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is widely performed as the preferred treatment for kidney stones larger than 20 mm in pediatric patients, with current research focusing on comparing outcomes between prone and supine positions to determine optimal procedural positioning. Therefore, the aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of prone versus supine positioning in pediatric PCNL, providing clarity on this critical aspect of the procedure to guide clinical decision-making. MethodsWe conducted a systematic review in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane, Web of Science and Google Scholar. We included studies that compared PCNL in prone vs supine positions for pediatric patients. Our primary outcome was stone-free rate (SFR). Secondary outcomes included operative time, length of hospital stay and overall complications rate. The statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4. ResultsWe retrieved 8 articles, with 269 patients in the prone group and 223 patients in the supine group. The mean age of all patients was 7.92 years old. Our findings presented no statistically significant difference in SFR between the two positions (OR 0.67; CI95 0.38, 1.18; p = 0.17; I 2 = 0%). Additionally, we noted a significant reduction in operative time in the supine position group (MD 13.75; CI95 4.35, 23.15; p = 0.004; I 2 = 84%). At the same time, the length of hospital stay after the procedure was lower in supine group (MD 0.61; CI95 0.34, 0.88; p < 0.0001; I 2 = 21%). No difference was observed regarding the total complication rate (OR 1.47; CI95 0.88, 2.47; p = 0.15; I 2 = 0%). ConclusionOur meta-analysis suggests that PCNL performed in the prone position is equivalent to supine PCNL in terms of SFR. However, mainly in the RCT studies, we could observe benefits of the supine position in comparison of prone position in terms of lower operative time, as well as a reduced postoperative hospital stay.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.