Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews/Meta-analyses of Transurethral Procedure for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia_Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Authors：

 LITao ¹ , WEINa-sha ² ,  FUChong-de ¹ , FUSheng-jun ³ , YANGLi ³ , WANGZhi-ping ³ , CHENGuang-yu ¹ , CHENGJi ⁴

1. Department of Urology, Xi'an Aerospace General Hospital, Xi'an 710100, China;
2. Xi'an Beilin District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Xi'an 710100, China;
3. Department of Urology, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730030, China;
4. Department of Urology, Shanxi Province Hospital, Xi'an 710100, China;

Corresponding?author：

FUChong-de, Email: fchd1984@163.com

Keywords：

Benign prostatic hyperplasia; Systematic review; Meta-analysis; Methodological quality; Reporting quality

DOI：

10.7507/1672-2531.20150202

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To assess the methodological and reporting quality of systematic reviews/Meta-analyses (SRs/MAs) of transurethral procedure for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). Method We electronically searched databases including PubMed, The Cochrane Library (Issue 12, 2014), Sciverse, CNKI, VIP and WanFang Data from inception to December 2014 to collect SRs/MAs of transurethral procedure about BPH. Two reviewers independently screened literature and assessed the methodological and reporting quality of included SRs/MAs by AMSTAR and PRISMA checklists. Results A total of 33 SRs/MAs were included. The results of qualitative analysis showed that:the main methodological weakness of included SRs/MAs included the lack of protocol, disappropriate conclusion formulation, the lack of publication bias assessment, and the lack of stating the conflict of interest. The average score of AMSTAR scale was 6.27±2.14. There were 11 items in PRISMA checklist with coincidence rate over 80%, 8 items between 50% to 80%, and 8 items less than 50%. Conclusion The methodological and reporting quality of SR/MA of transurethral procedure for BHP is low, and that may decrease the reliability and value of results from SRs/MAs in the field. Future SRs/MAs should strictly follow the related reporting guidelines in order to improve the methodological and reporting quality, so as to provide more reliable evidence for clinical decision.

Citation： LITao, WEINa-sha, FUChong-de, FUSheng-jun, YANGLi, WANGZhi-ping, CHENGuang-yu, CHENGJi. Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews/Meta-analyses of Transurethral Procedure for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine, 2015, 15(10): 1224-1230. doi: 10.7507/1672-2531.20150202 Copy

1.	李靜, 李幼平. 不斷完善與發展的Cochrane系統評價. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2008, 8(9):742-743.
2.	熊俊, 陳日新. 系統評價/Meta分析方法學質量的評價工具AMSTAR. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2011, 11(9):1084-1089.
3.	Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR:A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2007, 7(10):1-10.
4.	茍亞妮, 金安琴, 史琳, 等. 國內潰瘍性結腸炎系統評價/Meta分析研究的方法質量評價. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2014, 14(4):219-228.
5.	周俊紅, 任瑞民, 蘭曉煦. 經尿道等離子氣化電切術與經尿道電切術治療良性前列腺增生癥療效及安全性比較:Meta分析. 中國醫療前沿, 2010, 5(4):10-12.
6.	杜依青, 米白冰, 王鈺, 等. 經尿道等離子雙極電切術與傳統單極電切術治療前列腺增生癥比較的Meta分析. 現代泌尿外科雜志, 2014, 19(7):456-461.
7.	趙楚標, 李炬聰, 袁平慶, 等. 經尿道鈥激光前列腺剜除術治療BPH的Meta分析. 中華男科學雜志, 2011,17(12):1112-1120.
8.	許明偉, 張杰, 王偉, 等. 經尿道選擇性綠激光汽化術與經尿道前列腺電切術治療良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 腹腔鏡外科雜志, 2012, 17(4):262-267.
9.	樊曉棟, 朱偉智, 王鋼, 等. 綠激光選擇性前列腺汽化術與經尿道前列腺電切術治療前列腺增生對比研究(Meta分析). 現代實用醫學, 2014, 26(10):1200-1203.
10.	楊金明, 齊文旭, 趙雙生. 2μm激光與等離子電切治療良性前列腺增生療效的Meta分析. 臨床泌尿外科雜志, 2014, 29(8):681-684.
11.	康衛民, 王東文. 銩激光與經尿道電切治療前列腺增生療效比較Meta分析. 中國當代醫藥, 2013, 20(11):11-14.
12.	陳暉, 湯平, 歐汝彪, 等. 鈥激光前列腺剜除術和開放前列腺切除術治療大體積良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 南方醫科大學學報, 2012, 32(6):882-885.
13.	譚愛花, 廖存, 曹云飛, 等. 鈥激光剜除術和經尿道前列腺切除術治療癥狀性前列腺梗阻的meta分析. 中華腔鏡泌尿外科雜志(電子版), 2008, 2(1):9-15.
14.	趙春雷, 姜慶, 鄭昌建, 等. 鈥激光剜除術治療良性前列腺增生癥療效及安全性的Meta分析. 激光雜志, 2012, 33(5):56-58.
15.	李勝, 曾憲濤, 郭毅, 等. 經尿道等離子腔內剜除術與經尿道等離子雙極電切術比較治療良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2011, 11(10):1172-1183.
16.	任瑞民, 周俊紅, 蘭曉煦. 經尿道電汽化切除術與經尿道電切術治療良性前列腺增生癥療效及安全性比較. 醫學研究雜志, 2009, 38(3):76-81.
17.	林云僑, 李惠長, 劉昌明, 等. 經尿道電切除術和經尿道等離子雙極電切術治療良性前列腺增生的META分析. 中國醫學創新, 2010, 7(13):5-7.
18.	周渝, 鐘強, 鄭昌建, 等. 系統評價經尿道銩激光前列腺剜除術的安全性與有效性. 激光雜志, 2013, 34(3):61-64.
19.	樸勇一, 莫君甫, 周渝, 等. 系統評價經尿道選擇性綠激光前列腺汽化術的療效和安全性. 激光雜志, 2013, 34(1):61-63.
20.	宗煥濤, 彭曉霞, 楊稱稱, 等. 經尿道前列腺切除術對性功能影響的Meta分析. 中華男科學雜志, 2011, 17(11):1014-1018.
21.	陳暉, 湯平, 歐汝彪, 等. 開放前列腺切除術與經尿道前列腺電切術治療大體積前列腺增生安全性的Meta分析. 實用醫學雜志, 2012, 28(11):1800-1802.
22.	Ahyai SA, Gilling P, Kaplan SA, et al. Meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol, 2010, 58(3):384-397.
23.	Ding H, Du W, Lu ZP, et al. Photoselective green-light laser vaporisation vs. TURP for BPH:meta-analysis. Asian J Androl, 2012, 14(5):720-725.
24.	Tang K, Xu Z, Xia D, et al. Early outcomes of thulium laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia:a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. J Endourol, 2014, 28(1):65-72.
25.	Herrmann TR, Georgiou A, Bach T, et al. Laser treatments of the prostate vs TURP/open prostatectomy:systematic review of urodynamic data. Minerva Urol Nefrol, 2009, 61(3):309-324.
26.	Zhang X, Geng J, Zheng J, et al. Photoselective vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia:a meta-analysis. J Endourol, 2012, 26(9):1109-1117.
27.	Teng J, Zhang D, Li Y, et al. Photoselective vaporization with the green light laser vs transurethral resection of the prostate for treating benign prostate hyperplasia:a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2013, 111(2):312-323.
28.	Hoffman RM, MacDonald R, Slaton JW, et al. Laser prostatectomy versus transurethral resection for treating benign prostatic obstruction:a systematic review. J Urol, 2003, 169(1):210-215.
29.	Lourenco T, Shaw M, Fraser C, et al. The clinical effectiveness of transurethral incision of the prostate:a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. World J Urol, 2010, 28(1):23-32.
30.	Robert G, de la Taille A, Herrmann T. Bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate:ready to replace GreenLight? A systematic review of randomized control trials. World J Urol, 2015, 33(4):549-54.
31.	Burke N, Whelan JP, Goeree L, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of transurethral resection of the prostate versus minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. Urology, 2010, 75(5):1015-1022.
32.	Li S, Zeng XT, Ruan XL, et al. Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia:an updated systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. PLoS One, 2014, 9(7):e101615.
33.	Yin L, Teng J, Huang CJ, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate:a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Endourol, 2013, 27(5):604-611.
34.	Tan A, Liao C, Mo Z, et al. Meta-analysis of holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic prostatic obstruction. Br J Surg, 2007, 94(10):1201-1208.
35.	Tang Y, Li J, Pu C, et al. Bipolar transurethral resection versus monopolar transurethral resection for benign prostatic hypertrophy:a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol, 2014, 28(9):1107-1114.
36.	Poulakis V, Dahm P, Witzsch U, et al. Transurethral electrovaporization vs transurethral resection for symptomatic prostatic obstruction:a meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2004, 94(1):89-95.
37.	Lucca I, Shariat SF, Hofbauer SL, et al. Outcomes of minimally invasive simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia:a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol, 2015, 33(4):563-570.
38.	David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, et al. 系統綜述和薈萃分析優先報告的條目:PRISMA聲明. 中西醫結合雜志, 2009, 7(9):889-896.
39.	菅玥, 王竹, 白晨潞, 等. 阻生牙拔除術后并發癥防治的系統評價/Meta分析的匯總評價. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2013, 13(6):747-753.

1. 李靜, 李幼平. 不斷完善與發展的Cochrane系統評價. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2008, 8(9):742-743.
2. 熊俊, 陳日新. 系統評價/Meta分析方法學質量的評價工具AMSTAR. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2011, 11(9):1084-1089.
3. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR:A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol, 2007, 7(10):1-10.
4. 茍亞妮, 金安琴, 史琳, 等. 國內潰瘍性結腸炎系統評價/Meta分析研究的方法質量評價. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2014, 14(4):219-228.
5. 周俊紅, 任瑞民, 蘭曉煦. 經尿道等離子氣化電切術與經尿道電切術治療良性前列腺增生癥療效及安全性比較:Meta分析. 中國醫療前沿, 2010, 5(4):10-12.
6. 杜依青, 米白冰, 王鈺, 等. 經尿道等離子雙極電切術與傳統單極電切術治療前列腺增生癥比較的Meta分析. 現代泌尿外科雜志, 2014, 19(7):456-461.
7. 趙楚標, 李炬聰, 袁平慶, 等. 經尿道鈥激光前列腺剜除術治療BPH的Meta分析. 中華男科學雜志, 2011,17(12):1112-1120.
8. 許明偉, 張杰, 王偉, 等. 經尿道選擇性綠激光汽化術與經尿道前列腺電切術治療良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 腹腔鏡外科雜志, 2012, 17(4):262-267.
9. 樊曉棟, 朱偉智, 王鋼, 等. 綠激光選擇性前列腺汽化術與經尿道前列腺電切術治療前列腺增生對比研究(Meta分析). 現代實用醫學, 2014, 26(10):1200-1203.
10. 楊金明, 齊文旭, 趙雙生. 2μm激光與等離子電切治療良性前列腺增生療效的Meta分析. 臨床泌尿外科雜志, 2014, 29(8):681-684.
11. 康衛民, 王東文. 銩激光與經尿道電切治療前列腺增生療效比較Meta分析. 中國當代醫藥, 2013, 20(11):11-14.
12. 陳暉, 湯平, 歐汝彪, 等. 鈥激光前列腺剜除術和開放前列腺切除術治療大體積良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 南方醫科大學學報, 2012, 32(6):882-885.
13. 譚愛花, 廖存, 曹云飛, 等. 鈥激光剜除術和經尿道前列腺切除術治療癥狀性前列腺梗阻的meta分析. 中華腔鏡泌尿外科雜志(電子版), 2008, 2(1):9-15.
14. 趙春雷, 姜慶, 鄭昌建, 等. 鈥激光剜除術治療良性前列腺增生癥療效及安全性的Meta分析. 激光雜志, 2012, 33(5):56-58.
15. 李勝, 曾憲濤, 郭毅, 等. 經尿道等離子腔內剜除術與經尿道等離子雙極電切術比較治療良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2011, 11(10):1172-1183.
16. 任瑞民, 周俊紅, 蘭曉煦. 經尿道電汽化切除術與經尿道電切術治療良性前列腺增生癥療效及安全性比較. 醫學研究雜志, 2009, 38(3):76-81.
17. 林云僑, 李惠長, 劉昌明, 等. 經尿道電切除術和經尿道等離子雙極電切術治療良性前列腺增生的META分析. 中國醫學創新, 2010, 7(13):5-7.
18. 周渝, 鐘強, 鄭昌建, 等. 系統評價經尿道銩激光前列腺剜除術的安全性與有效性. 激光雜志, 2013, 34(3):61-64.
19. 樸勇一, 莫君甫, 周渝, 等. 系統評價經尿道選擇性綠激光前列腺汽化術的療效和安全性. 激光雜志, 2013, 34(1):61-63.
20. 宗煥濤, 彭曉霞, 楊稱稱, 等. 經尿道前列腺切除術對性功能影響的Meta分析. 中華男科學雜志, 2011, 17(11):1014-1018.
21. 陳暉, 湯平, 歐汝彪, 等. 開放前列腺切除術與經尿道前列腺電切術治療大體積前列腺增生安全性的Meta分析. 實用醫學雜志, 2012, 28(11):1800-1802.
22. Ahyai SA, Gilling P, Kaplan SA, et al. Meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol, 2010, 58(3):384-397.
23. Ding H, Du W, Lu ZP, et al. Photoselective green-light laser vaporisation vs. TURP for BPH:meta-analysis. Asian J Androl, 2012, 14(5):720-725.
24. Tang K, Xu Z, Xia D, et al. Early outcomes of thulium laser versus transurethral resection of the prostate for managing benign prostatic hyperplasia:a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies. J Endourol, 2014, 28(1):65-72.
25. Herrmann TR, Georgiou A, Bach T, et al. Laser treatments of the prostate vs TURP/open prostatectomy:systematic review of urodynamic data. Minerva Urol Nefrol, 2009, 61(3):309-324.
26. Zhang X, Geng J, Zheng J, et al. Photoselective vaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia:a meta-analysis. J Endourol, 2012, 26(9):1109-1117.
27. Teng J, Zhang D, Li Y, et al. Photoselective vaporization with the green light laser vs transurethral resection of the prostate for treating benign prostate hyperplasia:a systematic review and meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2013, 111(2):312-323.
28. Hoffman RM, MacDonald R, Slaton JW, et al. Laser prostatectomy versus transurethral resection for treating benign prostatic obstruction:a systematic review. J Urol, 2003, 169(1):210-215.
29. Lourenco T, Shaw M, Fraser C, et al. The clinical effectiveness of transurethral incision of the prostate:a systematic review of randomised controlled trials. World J Urol, 2010, 28(1):23-32.
30. Robert G, de la Taille A, Herrmann T. Bipolar plasma vaporization of the prostate:ready to replace GreenLight? A systematic review of randomized control trials. World J Urol, 2015, 33(4):549-54.
31. Burke N, Whelan JP, Goeree L, et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of transurethral resection of the prostate versus minimally invasive procedures for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction. Urology, 2010, 75(5):1015-1022.
32. Li S, Zeng XT, Ruan XL, et al. Holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia:an updated systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis. PLoS One, 2014, 9(7):e101615.
33. Yin L, Teng J, Huang CJ, et al. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate versus transurethral resection of the prostate:a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Endourol, 2013, 27(5):604-611.
34. Tan A, Liao C, Mo Z, et al. Meta-analysis of holmium laser enucleation versus transurethral resection of the prostate for symptomatic prostatic obstruction. Br J Surg, 2007, 94(10):1201-1208.
35. Tang Y, Li J, Pu C, et al. Bipolar transurethral resection versus monopolar transurethral resection for benign prostatic hypertrophy:a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol, 2014, 28(9):1107-1114.
36. Poulakis V, Dahm P, Witzsch U, et al. Transurethral electrovaporization vs transurethral resection for symptomatic prostatic obstruction:a meta-analysis. BJU Int, 2004, 94(1):89-95.
37. Lucca I, Shariat SF, Hofbauer SL, et al. Outcomes of minimally invasive simple prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia:a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Urol, 2015, 33(4):563-570.
38. David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff, et al. 系統綜述和薈萃分析優先報告的條目:PRISMA聲明. 中西醫結合雜志, 2009, 7(9):889-896.
39. 菅玥, 王竹, 白晨潞, 等. 阻生牙拔除術后并發癥防治的系統評價/Meta分析的匯總評價. 中國循證醫學雜志, 2013, 13(6):747-753.

Previous Article
Clinical Features of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Cases with Pathogens Infection: A Systematic Review
Next Article
Evaluation of Reliability and Validity of Quality of Working Life Scale (QWL7-32)

Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Methodological and Reporting Quality of Systematic Reviews/Meta-analyses of Transurethral Procedure for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content