Table 1.
Studies enrolled in this meta-analysis
| Study | Year | Study design | Method | Cases | Follow-up (mos.) | Recurrence (%) | Progression (%) | Quality assessmenta | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NIT | WLC | NIT | WLC | NIT | WLC | NIT | WLC | |||||
| Riedl [8] | 2001 | RCT | 5-ALA | 51 | 51 | NA | NA | 22 (45.8) | 31 (66) | 1 (2) | 1 (2) | 3 |
| Filbeck [9] | 2002 | RCT | 5-ALA | 88 | 103 | 21 | 21 | 10 (11.4) | 29 (28.2) | 2 (2.3) | 2 (1.9) | 3 |
| Kriegmair [10] | 2002 | RCT | 5-ALA | 65 | 64 | NA | NA | 17 (32.7) | 26 (53.1) | NA | NA | 2 |
| Babjuk [11] | 2005 | RCT | 5-ALA | 60 | 62 | 21 | 22 | 5 (8.3) | 23 (37.1) | 5 (8.3) | 5 (8.1) | 3 |
| Schumacher [12] | 2010 | RCT | 5-ALA | 138 | 141 | 12 | 12 | NA | NA | 14 (10.1) | 15 (10.6) | 1 |
| Stenzl [13] | 2011 | RCT | 5-ALA | 271 | 280 | 12 | 21 | 128 (47.2) | 157 (56.1) | 5 (1.8) | 7 (2.5) | 0 |
| Dragoescu [14] | 2011 | RCT | HAL | 22 | 22 | 9 | 9 | 4 (18.2) | 10 (45.5) | 1 (4.5) | 2 (9.1) | 3 |
| Hermann [15] | 2011 | RCT | HAL | 77 | 68 | 12 | 12 | 18 (30.5) | 35 (47.3) | 14 (34.1) | 17 (37.8) | 3 |
| Stenzl [16] | 2010 | RCT | HAL | 183 | 176 | 12 | 12 | NA | NA | 19 (10.4) | 19 (10.8) | 1 |
| Geavlete [17] | 2012 | RCT | HAL | 125 | 114 | 24 | 24 | 39 (66.1) | 52 (70.3) | 5 (4) | 8 (7) | 1 |
| Karaolides [18] | 2012 | RCT | HAL | 41 | 45 | 18 | 18 | 7 (17.1) | 18 (40) | NA | NA | 4 |
| Geavlete [19] | 2012 | RCT | NBI | 110 | 110 | 12 | 12 | 7 (6.4) | 16 (14.5) | NA | NA | 3 |
| Montanari [20] | 2012 | RCT | NBI | 47 | 45 | NA | NA | 16 (34) | 22 (48.9) | NA | NA | 4 |
| Naselli [21] | 2012 | RCT | NBI | 76 | 72 | 12 | 12 | 25 (32.9) | 37 (51.4) | NA | NA | 0 |
| Lee [22] | 2014 | RCT | NBI | 33 | 35 | 16 | 15 | 5 (15.2) | 8 (22.9) | 1 (3) | 2 (5.7) | 1 |
NIT new image technology, WLC white light cystoscopy, RCT randomized controlled trial, NA not applicable, 5-ALA 5-aminolaevulinic acid, HAL hexylaminolevulinate, NBI narrow band imaging
aQuality assessment was based on Cochrane’s risk of bias as a quality assessment tool for RCTs. If four or more domains are deemed “unclear” or “no,” the study was classified as having a high risk of bias. If two or three domains were deemed “unclear” or “no,” the study was classified as having a moderate risk of bias