Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 14, 2025

A Two-Step Method for Percutaneous Transhepatic Choledochoscopic Lithotomy
Published on: September 13, 2022
Is It Safe to Increase the Number of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Channels: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Rijin Song1, Chengjian Ji1, Rong Cong1
1Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, 210000 Nanjing, Jiangsu, China.
Purpose:
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) requires perforating the kidney, which may damage part of the patient's nephron. Further, compared with single-channel PCNL (S-PCNL), the safety of multi-channel PCNL (M-PCNL) and whether it affects the renal function of patients has been debated. The meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively evaluate the safety of M-PCNL.
Methods:
We carefully searched the Pubmed, Embass, and Web of Science databases for relevant research reported before October 30, 2021, and analyzed the included literature using the Stata software. Changes in the serum creatinine levels, split renal function and the incidence of postoperative complications were used to evaluate the safety of M-PCNL.
Results:
Overall, 11 articles were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference between S-PCNL and M-PCNL in terms of changes in serum creatinine levels (pooled Mean Difference (MD) = -0.015, 95% CI: -0.047-0.018, I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.92). Further, a sensitivity analysis showed that our conclusions were stable. With the p-values in both Egger's and Begg's tests being greater than 0.05, there was no significant publication bias in the included literature. A subgroup analysis based on patient ethnicity yielded consistent results. Our meta-analysis yielded similar results in terms of changes in split renal function (pooled MD = 0.008, 95% CI: -0.013-0.030, I2 = 96%, p < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative renal perforation between M-PCNL and S-PCNL (pooled Odds Ratio (OR) = 1.686, 95% CI: 0.677-4.193, I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.66). However, M-PCNL was found to cause more postoperative blood transfusion, postoperative infection, and pleural damage than S-PCNL (pooled OR = 3.104, 95% CI: 2.277-4.232, I2 = 46%, p = 0.03, pooled OR = 1.862, 95% CI: 1.165-2.974, I2 = 0%, p = 0.46, and pooled OR = 3.446, 95% CI: 1.168-10.171, I2 = 0%, p = 1.00 respectively).
Conclusions:
Compared with S-PCNL, M-PCNL showed no significant differences in terms of changes in serum creatinine levels in patients. However, M-PCNL showed a greater probability of resulting in postoperative blood transfusion, postoperative infection, and pleural damage.
More Related Videos
09:29Author Spotlight: Improving Percutaneous Vertebroplasty Surgical Accuracy and Efficiency Through Advanced Puncture Techniques
Published on: August 9, 2024
05:17Author Spotlight: Scope of LE-ULBD as a Safe, Effective, and Minimally Invasive Approach to Treat Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
Published on: February 9, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Urinary Tract Calculi VI: Surgical Management
Urinary Tract Calculi IV: Nutrition Therapy and Prevention
Cardiac Catheterization I: Pre-Procedure Overview
Urinary Tract Calculi III: Medical Management
Imaging Studies V: Intravenous Urography and Retrograde Pyelography
Urinary Tract Calculi V: Nursing Management