经尿道钬激光汽化术与电切术治疗腺性膀胱炎的Meta分析

Meta-analysis of transurethral holmium laser and electric incision for treatment of cystitis glandularis

目的探讨经尿道钬激光汽化术（HI）与电切术（EI）治疗腺性膀胱炎的安全性与有效性。方法计算机检索维普、万方、中国知网、PubMed、Cochrane和EMbase数据库,查找所有比较HI和EI治疗腺性膀胱炎的随机对照试验,检索时间范围从2001年1月1日～2013年12月31日,按纳入和排除标准由2人分别独立进行随机对照试验的筛选、提取和质量评价,应用RevMan5.2进行Meta分析。结果共纳入4个研究,共212例患者。Meta分析显示,EI治愈率低于HI,差异有高度统计学意义[OR=0.27,95%CI（0.13,0.55）,P〈0.01];EI有效率低于HI,差异有高度统计学意义[OR=0.20,95%CI（0.08,0.53）,P〈0.01];EI复发率高于HI,差异有高度统计学意义[OR=4.47,95%CI（1.68,11.85）,P〈0.01]。结论两种治疗腺性膀胱炎的术式相比,HI在治愈率、有效率、复发率方面均优于EI。

Objective To objectively investigate the efficacy and safety of transurethral holmium laser（HI） vs electric incision（EI） for treatment of cystitis glandularis. Methods The data were searched from VIP, Wanfang, CNKI,PubMed, Cochrane Library and EMBASE. The duration of search was from January 2001 to December 2013 for ran-domized controlled trials about transurethral HI and EI for treatment of cystitis glandularis. The collection, assessment and analysis of data were undertaken by 2 reviewers independently. And the RevMan 5.2 software was used to perform Meta-analyses. Results 4 studies and 212 patients were involved. According to the Meta-analyses, recovery rate of EI was lower than that of HI, the difference was statistically significant [OR = 0.27, 95%CI（0.13, 0.55）, P〈0.01]. The effective rate of EI was lower than that of HI, the difference was statistically significant [ OR = 2.23, 95%CI（1.14, 4.37）,P〈0.01]. The recurrence rate of EI was higher than that of HI, the difference was statistically significant [ OR = 4.47,95%CI（1.68, 11.85）, P〈0.01]. Conclusion The current evidence indicates that HI is superior to EI on the recovery rate, effective rate and recurrence rate.