Table 4.
Overall analysis of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR after PCNL
| Outcome of interest | No.of studies | No. of patients | MD (95%CI) | p-value | Study heterogeneity | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chi2 | df | I 2 | p-value | |||||
| CROES/Guy | ||||||||
| AUC | 7 | 1837/1837 | 0.09[− 0.12,0.29] | 0.41 | 14,350.0 | 6 | 100% | <0.0001 |
| STONE/Guy | ||||||||
| AUC | 8 | 2191/2191 | 0.00[−0.03,0.04] | 0.92 | 699.92 | 7 | 99% | <0.0001 |
| CROES/STONE | ||||||||
| AUC | 7 | 1662/1662 | −0.00[−0.05,0.04] | 0.94 | 491.21 | 6 | 99% | <0.0001 |
SFR stone free rate, PCNL percutaneous nephrolithotomy, AUC area under curve, CROES clinical research office of the endourological society scoring system, Guy Guy scoring system, S.T.O.N.E S.T.O.N.E scoring system, MD mean difference, CI confidence interval