Urologia internationalis · 2021
Taguchi versus Lich-Grégoir Extravesical Ureteroneocystostomy in Kidney Transplantation: A Systematic Review.
Систематический обзорСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wehner Hannah, Wullich Bernd, Kunath Frank, Apel Hendrik
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Ureteric implantation of the transplanted ureter into native urinary bladder tissue in kidney transplantation recipients is essential for post-operative kidney function. We aimed to determine the effects of Taguchi versus Lich-Grégoir extravesical ureteroneocystostomy in kidney transplantation.
METHODS: We searched multiple databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science), trial registries, and conference proceedings until March 2021. We included prospective studies comparing Taguchi and Lich-Grégoir ureteroneocystostomy in kidney transplantation. Two review authors independently screened the identified records, extracted data, evaluated the risk of bias using ROBINS-I, and assessed the certainty of evidence according to GRADE.
RESULTS: We identified 3 prospective studies with serious or critical risk of bias, leading to low-certainty evidence. We downgraded the risk of bias due to study limitations. Assessment and/or reporting of baseline imbalances, co-interventions, and confounding factors was insufficient in all included studies. The effect of Taguchi ureteroneocystostomy remains unclear.
CONCLUSION: Currently available evidence is not useful to determine the effect of Taguchi versus Lich-Grégoir ureteroneocystostomy in kidney transplantation. There is a need for methodologically better designed and executed studies, such as randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up reporting baseline imbalances, co-interventions, and confounding factors.
METHODS: We searched multiple databases (MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science), trial registries, and conference proceedings until March 2021. We included prospective studies comparing Taguchi and Lich-Grégoir ureteroneocystostomy in kidney transplantation. Two review authors independently screened the identified records, extracted data, evaluated the risk of bias using ROBINS-I, and assessed the certainty of evidence according to GRADE.
RESULTS: We identified 3 prospective studies with serious or critical risk of bias, leading to low-certainty evidence. We downgraded the risk of bias due to study limitations. Assessment and/or reporting of baseline imbalances, co-interventions, and confounding factors was insufficient in all included studies. The effect of Taguchi ureteroneocystostomy remains unclear.
CONCLUSION: Currently available evidence is not useful to determine the effect of Taguchi versus Lich-Grégoir ureteroneocystostomy in kidney transplantation. There is a need for methodologically better designed and executed studies, such as randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up reporting baseline imbalances, co-interventions, and confounding factors.