Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ultrasound-guided (UG) versus fluoroscopy-guided (FG) percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Methods: A systematic search of PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that compared UG-PCNL with FG-PCNL, and a meta-analysis of those studies was completed. The primary outcomes assessed were stone-free rate (SFR) and complication rate. Secondary outcomes assessed were the successful access-creation rate, time necessary for entrance into the target calyx, auxiliary procedure rate, transfusion rate, hemoglobin decrease after surgery, surgery duration, and hospital stay. Results: Eight studies comprising 966 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with FG-PCNL, UG-PCNL had comparable stone-free rates [odds ratio (OR) 0.95; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67–1.35; p = 0.79] irrespective of the patient’s position, and a favorable safety profile resulting in a lower complication rate (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.36–0.86; p = 0.009). No statistical difference was found between UG and FG groups in secondary outcomes. Conclusions: UG-PCNL is as effective as FG-PCNL and has the advantage of lower complication rates. In addition, UG-PCNL could be performed with patients in the supine position without compromising its efficacy.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)777-788
Number of pages12
JournalWorld Journal of Urology
Issue number5
Publication statusPublished - May 1 2019


  • Fluoroscopy
  • Meta-analysis
  • Nephrolithotomy
  • Percutaneous
  • Ultrasonography
  • Urinary calculi

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology


Dive into the research topics of 'Ultrasound-guided versus fluoroscopy-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this