LAUSR

PURPOSE We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy between laparoscopic transperitoneal ureterolithotomy (LTU) and laparoscopic retroperitoneal ureterolithotomy (LRU) in the treatment of large (>10mm) and proximal ureteral stones. MATERIALS AND METHODS Electronic databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched through December 2019. Comparative studies comparing the two approaches were included. The primary outcome was a single-procedure success rate; the secondary outcomes included operative time, hospital duration, and complications (according to the Clavien-Dindo Grade). Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) and the modified Jadad scale were used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. The Egger's test estimated publication bias. The meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager 5.3 and STATA 15.0. RESULTS Seven studies, involving 125 participants in LTU group and 128 in LRU group, were included in the study. The results suggested that both single-procedure success rate and the rate of postoperative paralytic ileus were significantly higher in the LTU group than in the LRU group (95.2% vs 87.5%, 95% CI: .00-.16, RD = .08, P = .04; 10.4% vs 0, 95% CI: .02- .19, RD = .10, P = .02, respectively). No publication bias of the primary outcome was observed with the Egger's test (P = .117). No significant differences were noted in terms of operative time and hospital duration (95% CI: -18.95-8.80, MD = -5.08, P = .47; 95% CI: -.98- .58, MD = -.20, P = .61, respectively). Additionally, according to Clavien-Dindo Grade, the rates of major complications (>= Grade 3a) including open conversion (.8% vs 5.5%, 95%CI: -.11- .01, RD = -.05, P = .12), stone migration (8.1% vs 6.7%, 95% CI: -.08- .11, RD = .02, P = .76), vascular injury (5.4% vs 0, 95%CI: -.03- .14, RD = .05, P = .21) and ureteral stricture (1.3% vs 5.3%, 95% CI: -.11- .02, RD = -.04, P = .20), were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION In the treatment of large and proximal ureteral calculi, LTU has a significantly higher single-procedure success rate and a higher rate of postoperative paralytic ileus than LRU. However, the complication was well-tolerated. The small sample size and limited, including studies, were the main limitations.