BackgroundPercutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is performed to treat relatively large renal stones. Recent publications indicate that tubeless and total tubeless (stentless) PCNL is safe in selected patients. We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate the feasibility and safety of different PCNL procedures, including total tubeless, tubeless with stent, small-bore tube, and large-bore tube PCNLs.MethodsPubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE™ databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials published before December 30, 2013. One researcher examined all titles and abstracts found by the searches. Two investigators independently evaluated the full-text articles to determine whether those met the inclusion criteria. Qualities of included studies were rated with Cochrane’s risk-of-bias assessment tool.ResultsSixteen studies were included in the final syntheses including pairwise and network meta-analyses. Operation time, pain scores, and transfusion rates were not significantly different between PCNL procedures. Network meta-analyses demonstrated that for hemoglobin changes, total tubeless PCNL may be superior to standard PCNL (mean difference [MD] 0.65, 95% CI 0.14–1.13) and tubeless PCNLs with stent (MD -1.14, 95% CI -1.65–-0.62), and small-bore PCNL may be superior to tubeless PCNL with stent (MD 1.30, 95% CI 0.27–2.26). Network meta-analyses also showed that for length of hospital stay, total tubeless (MD 1.33, 95% CI 0.23–2.43) and tubeless PCNLs with stent (MD 0.99, 95% CI 0.19–1.79) may be superior to standard PCNL. In rank probability tests, small-bore tube and total tubeless PCNLs were superior for operation time, pain scores, and hemoglobin changes.ConclusionsFor hemoglobin changes, total tubeless and small-bore PCNLs may be superior to other methods. For hospital stay, total tubeless and tubeless PCNLs with stent may be superior to other procedures.
Purpose
To determine the role of metabolic syndrome (MetS) as a risk factor for acquired premature ejaculation (PE) after considering the various risk factors, such as lower urinary tract symptoms, erectile dysfunction, hypogonadism, and prostatitis.
Materials and Methods
From January 2012 to January 2017, records of 1,029 men were analyzed. We performed multivariate analysis to identify risk factors for PE, including the covariate of age, marital status, International Prostate Symptom Score, International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) score, National Institutes of Health-Chronic Prostatitis Symptom Index (NIH-CPSI) score, serum testosterone levels, and all components of MetS. Acquired PE was defined as self-reported intravaginal ejaculation latency time ≤3 minutes, and MetS was diagnosed using the modified National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III criteria.
Results
Of 1,029 men, 74 subjects (7.2%) had acquired PE and 111 (10.8%) had MetS. Multivariate analysis showed that the IIEF overall satisfaction score (odds ratio [OR]=0.67, p<0.001), NIH-CPSI pain score (OR=1.07, p=0.035), NIH-CPSI voiding score (OR=1.17, p=0.032), and presence of MetS (OR=2.20, p=0.022) were significantly correlated with the prevalence of acquired PE. In addition, the Male Sexual Health Questionnaire for Ejaculatory Dysfunction scores and ejaculation anxiety scores progressively decreased as the number of components of MetS increased.
Conclusions
MetS may be an independent predisposing factor for the development of acquired PE. Effective prevention and treatment of MetS could also be important for the prevention and treatment of acquired PE.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.