Table 2.
Ureteral stone treatment, retreatment and complications
| No. Treatment/Total No. | No. Comparator/Total No. | RR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distal ureteral stones | |||
| Retreatment SR-URS vs SWL-other: | |||
| Verze e al14 | 10/136 | 57/137 | 0.18 (0.09–0.33) |
| Peschel et al18 | 0/40 | 4/40 | 0.20 (0.02–1.64) |
| Hendrikx et al17 | 8/87 | 31/69 | 0.20 (0.10–0.42) |
| Zeng et al15 | 4/180 | 25/210 | 0.19 (0.07–0.53) |
| Fixed effects meta-analysis | 0.14 (0.08–0.23) | ||
| Retreatment: | |||
| SR-URS vs SWL-HM316 | 0/32 | 0/32 | 1.00 (0.07–15.33) |
| SWL-other vs SWL-HM3 fixed effects model estimate indirect comparison | 5.62 (0.04–92.85) | ||
| Complications SR-URS vs SWL-other: | |||
| Verze e al14 | 26/136 | 24/137 | 1.09 (0.66–1.80) |
| Peschel et al18 | 0/40 | 0/40 | 1.00 (0.06–15.45) |
| Hendrikx et al17 | 30/87 | 14/69 | 1.70 (0.98–2.95) |
| Zeng et al15 | 12/180 | 12/210 | 1.17 (0.54–2.53) |
| Fixed effects meta-analysis | 1.28 (0.94–1.81) | ||
| Complications: | |||
| SR-URS vs SWL-HM316 | 8/32 | 3/32 | 2.67 (0.78–9.15) |
| SWL-other vs SWL-HM3 fixed effects model estimate indirect comparison | 2.26 (0.70–9.94) | ||
| Proximal ureteral stones | |||
| Retreatment: | |||
| SR-URS vs SWL-HM319 | 4/100 | 29/100 | 0.14 (0.05–0.38) |
| SWL-other vs SWL-HM322 | 27/30 | 22/27 | 1.10 (0.89–1.37) |
| SR-URS vs SWL-other fixed effects model estimate indirect comparison | 0.08 (0.02–0.32) | ||
| PNL vs SR-URS20 | 7/50 | 11/50 | 0.64 (0.27–1.51) |
| Flexible URS vs SWL-other21 | 8/19 | 7/19 | 1.14 (0.52–2.52) |
| Complications: | |||
| SR-URS vs SWL-HM319 | 13/100 | 23/100 | 0.57 (0.30–1.05) |
| SWL-other vs SWL-HM322 | 5/30 | 21/27 | 0.21 (0.09–0.49) |
| SR-URS vs SWL-other fixed effects model estimate indirect comparison | 8.71 (2.11–42.58) | ||
| PNL vs SR-URS20 | 9/50 | 0/50 | 10.00 (1.33–75.28) |
| Flexible URS vs SWL-other21 | 18/20 | 2/22 | 9.90 (2.62–37.41) |