Ureteroscopy in Patients with Bleeding Diatheses, Anticoagulated, and on Anti-Platelet Agents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Literature.

Abstract

Ureteroscopy (URS) is the most common surgical treatment of urolithiasis and can be problematic in patients with a bleeding diathesis. The intent of this review is to systematically review the literature to assess the safety and efficacy of ureteroscopic procedures in these groups of patients. The systematic review was performed according to the Cochrane diagnostic accuracy review guidelines. The search strategy was conducted to perform a comprehensive database search (1990-2017). A cumulative analysis was done and where applicable a comparative analysis between bleeding diathesis patients and those without. Eight studies included were all published between 1998 and 2016 with the total number of participants with bleeding diatheses being 1109 with an age range of 18-97. Overall stone-free rate across the studies was 90.8% vs 86.2% in the control group. There was no significant difference in complications between the bleeding diathesis group and control group (N = 12,757, p = 0.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92, 6.02, I2 = 78%). Pooled analysis for bleeding-related complications shows a statistically significant difference favoring the control arm (N = 12,757, p ≤ 0.0001, 95% CI 1.81, 5.73, I2 = 0%). Pooled analysis for thrombosis shows no statistically significant difference between the bleeding diathesis group and the control arm (N = 118, p = 0.67, 95% CI 0.23, 9.86, I2 = 48%). The use of URS with or without the holmium laser is a safe and efficient modality for treating patients with urolithiasis who also have a bleeding diathesis or are anticoagulated or on antiplatelet agents. However, this review would suggest that the increased risk of procedure related bleeding is not insignificant and a patient-centered approach should be taken with regards to continuing these agents or not correcting bleeding diatheses.