Comparing Balloon Dilation to Non-Balloon Dilation for Access in Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A...

This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrasound-guided balloon dilation compared to non-balloon dilation for percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL).

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. Results were filtered using predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria as described and meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 software.

A total of six studies involving 1189 patients who underwent PCNL were included. The meta-analysis results demonstrated that compared to non-balloon dilation, balloon dilation was associated with reduced haemoglobin drop [mean difference (MD) = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.40 ~ -0.12, P = 0.0002], decreased transfusion rate [odds ratio (OR) = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.24 ~ 0.92, P = 0.03], shorter tract establishment time (MD = -1.30, 95% CI = -1.87 ~ -0.72, P < 0.0001) and shorter operation time (MD = -5.23, 95% CI = -10.19 ~ -0.27, P = 0.04).

Overall, ultrasound-guided balloon dilatation offered several advantages in PCNL procedures. It facilitated faster access establishment, as evidenced by shorter access creation time. Additionally, it reduced the risk of kidney injury by minimizing postoperative haemoglobin drop and decreasing the need for transfusions. Moreover, it enhanced the efficiency of surgery by reducing the operation time. However, it is important to note that the quality of some included studies was subpar, as they did not adequately control for confounding factors that may affect the outcomes. Therefore, further research is necessary to validate and strengthen these findings.