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.	李静, 李幼平. 不断完善与发展的Cochrane系统评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 2008, 8(9):742-743.
2.	熊俊, 陈日新. 系统评价/Meta分析方法学质量的评价工具AMSTAR. 中国循证医学杂志, 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.	苟亚妮, 金安琴, 史琳, 等. 国内溃疡性结肠炎系统评价/Meta分析研究的方法质量评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 2014, 14(4):219-228.
5.	周俊红, 任瑞民, 兰晓煦. 经尿道等离子气化电切术与经尿道电切术治疗良性前列腺增生症疗效及安全性比较:Meta分析. 中国医疗前沿, 2010, 5(4):10-12.
6.	杜依青, 米白冰, 王钰, 等. 经尿道等离子双极电切术与传统单极电切术治疗前列腺增生症比较的Meta分析. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2014, 19(7):456-461.
7.	赵楚标, 李炬聪, 袁平庆, 等. 经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗BPH的Meta分析. 中华男科学杂志, 2011,17(12):1112-1120.
8.	许明伟, 张杰, 王伟, 等. 经尿道选择性绿激光汽化术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2012, 17(4):262-267.
9.	樊晓栋, 朱伟智, 王钢, 等. 绿激光选择性前列腺汽化术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗前列腺增生对比研究(Meta分析). 现代实用医学, 2014, 26(10):1200-1203.
10.	杨金明, 齐文旭, 赵双生. 2μm激光与等离子电切治疗良性前列腺增生疗效的Meta分析. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2014, 29(8):681-684.
11.	康卫民, 王东文. 铥激光与经尿道电切治疗前列腺增生疗效比较Meta分析. 中国当代医药, 2013, 20(11):11-14.
12.	陈晖, 汤平, 欧汝彪, 等. 钬激光前列腺剜除术和开放前列腺切除术治疗大体积良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 南方医科大学学报, 2012, 32(6):882-885.
13.	谭爱花, 廖存, 曹云飞, 等. 钬激光剜除术和经尿道前列腺切除术治疗症状性前列腺梗阻的meta分析. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2008, 2(1):9-15.
14.	赵春雷, 姜庆, 郑昌建, 等. 钬激光剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生症疗效及安全性的Meta分析. 激光杂志, 2012, 33(5):56-58.
15.	李胜, 曾宪涛, 郭毅, 等. 经尿道等离子腔内剜除术与经尿道等离子双极电切术比较治疗良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 中国循证医学杂志, 2011, 11(10):1172-1183.
16.	任瑞民, 周俊红, 兰晓煦. 经尿道电汽化切除术与经尿道电切术治疗良性前列腺增生症疗效及安全性比较. 医学研究杂志, 2009, 38(3):76-81.
17.	林云侨, 李惠长, 刘昌明, 等. 经尿道电切除术和经尿道等离子双极电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的META分析. 中国医学创新, 2010, 7(13):5-7.
18.	周渝, 钟强, 郑昌建, 等. 系统评价经尿道铥激光前列腺剜除术的安全性与有效性. 激光杂志, 2013, 34(3):61-64.
19.	朴勇一, 莫君甫, 周渝, 等. 系统评价经尿道选择性绿激光前列腺汽化术的疗效和安全性. 激光杂志, 2013, 34(1):61-63.
20.	宗焕涛, 彭晓霞, 杨称称, 等. 经尿道前列腺切除术对性功能影响的Meta分析. 中华男科学杂志, 2011, 17(11):1014-1018.
21.	陈晖, 汤平, 欧汝彪, 等. 开放前列腺切除术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗大体积前列腺增生安全性的Meta分析. 实用医学杂志, 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. 系统综述和荟萃分析优先报告的条目:PRISMA声明. 中西医结合杂志, 2009, 7(9):889-896.
39.	菅玥, 王竹, 白晨潞, 等. 阻生牙拔除术后并发症防治的系统评价/Meta分析的汇总评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 2013, 13(6):747-753.

1. 李静, 李幼平. 不断完善与发展的Cochrane系统评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 2008, 8(9):742-743.
2. 熊俊, 陈日新. 系统评价/Meta分析方法学质量的评价工具AMSTAR. 中国循证医学杂志, 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. 苟亚妮, 金安琴, 史琳, 等. 国内溃疡性结肠炎系统评价/Meta分析研究的方法质量评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 2014, 14(4):219-228.
5. 周俊红, 任瑞民, 兰晓煦. 经尿道等离子气化电切术与经尿道电切术治疗良性前列腺增生症疗效及安全性比较:Meta分析. 中国医疗前沿, 2010, 5(4):10-12.
6. 杜依青, 米白冰, 王钰, 等. 经尿道等离子双极电切术与传统单极电切术治疗前列腺增生症比较的Meta分析. 现代泌尿外科杂志, 2014, 19(7):456-461.
7. 赵楚标, 李炬聪, 袁平庆, 等. 经尿道钬激光前列腺剜除术治疗BPH的Meta分析. 中华男科学杂志, 2011,17(12):1112-1120.
8. 许明伟, 张杰, 王伟, 等. 经尿道选择性绿激光汽化术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 腹腔镜外科杂志, 2012, 17(4):262-267.
9. 樊晓栋, 朱伟智, 王钢, 等. 绿激光选择性前列腺汽化术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗前列腺增生对比研究(Meta分析). 现代实用医学, 2014, 26(10):1200-1203.
10. 杨金明, 齐文旭, 赵双生. 2μm激光与等离子电切治疗良性前列腺增生疗效的Meta分析. 临床泌尿外科杂志, 2014, 29(8):681-684.
11. 康卫民, 王东文. 铥激光与经尿道电切治疗前列腺增生疗效比较Meta分析. 中国当代医药, 2013, 20(11):11-14.
12. 陈晖, 汤平, 欧汝彪, 等. 钬激光前列腺剜除术和开放前列腺切除术治疗大体积良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 南方医科大学学报, 2012, 32(6):882-885.
13. 谭爱花, 廖存, 曹云飞, 等. 钬激光剜除术和经尿道前列腺切除术治疗症状性前列腺梗阻的meta分析. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2008, 2(1):9-15.
14. 赵春雷, 姜庆, 郑昌建, 等. 钬激光剜除术治疗良性前列腺增生症疗效及安全性的Meta分析. 激光杂志, 2012, 33(5):56-58.
15. 李胜, 曾宪涛, 郭毅, 等. 经尿道等离子腔内剜除术与经尿道等离子双极电切术比较治疗良性前列腺增生的Meta分析. 中国循证医学杂志, 2011, 11(10):1172-1183.
16. 任瑞民, 周俊红, 兰晓煦. 经尿道电汽化切除术与经尿道电切术治疗良性前列腺增生症疗效及安全性比较. 医学研究杂志, 2009, 38(3):76-81.
17. 林云侨, 李惠长, 刘昌明, 等. 经尿道电切除术和经尿道等离子双极电切术治疗良性前列腺增生的META分析. 中国医学创新, 2010, 7(13):5-7.
18. 周渝, 钟强, 郑昌建, 等. 系统评价经尿道铥激光前列腺剜除术的安全性与有效性. 激光杂志, 2013, 34(3):61-64.
19. 朴勇一, 莫君甫, 周渝, 等. 系统评价经尿道选择性绿激光前列腺汽化术的疗效和安全性. 激光杂志, 2013, 34(1):61-63.
20. 宗焕涛, 彭晓霞, 杨称称, 等. 经尿道前列腺切除术对性功能影响的Meta分析. 中华男科学杂志, 2011, 17(11):1014-1018.
21. 陈晖, 汤平, 欧汝彪, 等. 开放前列腺切除术与经尿道前列腺电切术治疗大体积前列腺增生安全性的Meta分析. 实用医学杂志, 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. 系统综述和荟萃分析优先报告的条目:PRISMA声明. 中西医结合杂志, 2009, 7(9):889-896.
39. 菅玥, 王竹, 白晨潞, 等. 阻生牙拔除术后并发症防治的系统评价/Meta分析的汇总评价. 中国循证医学杂志, 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