IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0129317.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Laparoscopic Nephrectomy versus Open Nephrectomy for Patients with Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Pengyu Guo
  • Wanhai Xu
  • Huibo Li
  • Tong Ren
  • Shaobin Ni
  • Minghua Ren

Abstract

Objective: To compare efficacy and safety of laparoscopicnephrectomy (LN) versusopen nephrectomy (ON) in the management of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: A systematic search of the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library was performed up to October 2014.This systematic review was performed based on observational comparative studies that assessed the two techniques. The weighted mean difference (WMD) and risk ratio (RR), with their corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI), were calculated to compare continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Results: Seven studies were identified, including 195 cases (118 LN / 77 ON). Although LN was associated with longer operative time (WMD 30.236, 95%CI 14.541 −45.932, P

Suggested Citation

  • Pengyu Guo & Wanhai Xu & Huibo Li & Tong Ren & Shaobin Ni & Minghua Ren, 2015. "Laparoscopic Nephrectomy versus Open Nephrectomy for Patients with Autosomal Dominant Polycystic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0129317
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129317
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0129317
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0129317&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0129317?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0129317. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.