Single- versus Multiple-Tract Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Surgical Management of Staghorn Stones or Complex Caliceal Calculi: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Objective. To assess current evidence on the effectiveness and safety of single- versus multiple-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the surgical management of complex caliceal calculi or staghorn stones through a comprehensive literature review. Methods. A comprehensive literature review of articles investigating the clinical efficacy and safety of single- versus multiple-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy was performed. Relevant literature was obtained by systematically searching PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library through May 2020. We followed the search strategy based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The primary outcomes, including the stone-free rate (SFR), and secondary outcomes (peri- and postoperative complications and operative data) were evaluated using RevMan 5.3 statistical software. Results. Ten studies involving 1844 patients with complex caliceal calculi or staghorn stones met the inclusion criteria. Single-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (STPCNL) had noninferior clinical efficacy with respect to the immediate SFR (, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.46 to 1.38), ) and 3-month SFR (, 95% CI (0.38 to 3.92), ) compared with multiple-tract percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MTPCNL). In addition, pooled analyses showed that STPCNL resulted in significantly lower hemoglobin decreases (, 95% CI (-0.68 to -0.25), ), fewer blood transfusions (, 95% CI (0.34 to 0.67), ), and fewer pulmonary complications (, 95% CI (0.09 to 0.83), ) than MTPCNL. However, the overall evidence was insufficient to suggest a statistically significant difference for other adverse events. Conclusion. This meta-analysis indicated that STPCNL is an effective method for treating complex caliceal calculi or staghorn stones. Compared with MTPCNL, STPCNL not only yields similarly high SFRs but also is associated with many advantages, less blood loss, fewer blood transfusions, and fewer pulmonary complications without an increase in other complications. However, the findings of this study should be further confirmed by well-designed prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a larger patient series.