A systematic search using the Ovid platform was completed. The primary outcome was risk of ureteric injury. Secondary outcomes included the risk of acute kidney injury(AKI), urinary tract infection(UTI), sepsis, length of stay(LOS), and mortality. The Paule-Mandel pooling and a random effects model was used to produce odds ratios(OR) with 95% confidence intervals(CI) for binary outcomes. Standardized mean differences(MD) were reported for continuous variables. Analyses were completed using R3.5.
Nine retrospective cohort studies evaluating 98,507 patients were included. The incidence of ureteric injury was 0.6%. Overall, 5.1% of patients underwent ureteric stenting. There was no change in the odds of ureteric injury among stented patients compared to controls (OR 1.30,95%CI 0.39-4.29,I =25%). OR time was significantly longer (MD 49.3 minutes, 95%CI 35.3-63.4, I =96%) in the intervention group. There was no difference in rates of AKI, UTI, sepsis, LOS, or mortality between groups.
Given the retrospective nature of the identified studies, the benefit of prophylactic ureteric stenting remains uncertain. Prophylactic ureteric stenting was not associated with increased patient morbidity but did significantly increase OR time.
This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.