Abstract
Objective: To review the status of comparative effectiveness studies for kidney stone disease with focus on study outcome, type, population, time trends, and patient-centered approaches. Methods: A systematic scoping review was performed for articles published between January 1, 2005, and March 30, 2021, using keywords relevant to kidney stone disease. Studies published in English that compared two or more alternative methods for prevention, diagnosis, treatment, monitoring, or care delivery were included. Two reviewers independently reviewed abstracts and an arbitrator resolved discrepancies. Nine reviewers abstracted information from full-length studies. Descriptive statistics were summarized, and linear regression was performed to evaluate temporal trends of study characteristics. Results: We reviewed 1773 abstracts and 707 full-length manuscripts focused on surgical intervention (440); medical expulsive therapy (MET) (152); analgesic control (80); and homeopathic, diagnostics, and/or prophylaxis (84). Randomized controlled trials were common across all outcome categories, including surgery (41.6%), MET (60.2%), analgesic control (81.3%), homeopathic (41.2%), diagnostic (47.6%), and prophylaxis (49.1%). Patient-reported outcomes were utilized in 71.7% and 95% of MET and analgesic control studies, respectively, but in the minority of all other study themes. Over time, meta-analyses and multicenter studies increased [P < .001]. Conclusion: Surgical and MET themes dominate published comparative literature in kidney stone disease. There is substantial variation in use of patient-reported outcomes across surgical themes. Multicentered studies and those generating higher level evidence have increased over time but opportunities exist to improve collaborative, high-quality, and patient-centered research in kidney stone disease.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 3-10 |
| Number of pages | 8 |
| Journal | Urology |
| Volume | 183 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jan 2024 |
Funding
Funding Support: This work is supported in part by a research grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23 DK125670) to Dr David I. Chu as well as NIH T32 research grants supporting Dr Ryan Spiardi (NIH 5T32DK7006-48 & NIH 5T32DK7006-49). The NIH/NIDDK had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the NIH/NIDDK. Jonathan S. Ellison: paid consultant for Alnylam Pharmaceuticals (not active, but present w/in past 24 months); paid contributor for UpToDate (active). Gregory Tasian: Gregory Tasian is on the Scientific Advisory Board of, is a consultant for, and receives research funding from Dicerna Pharmaceuticals and Alnylam Pharmaceuticals. David I. Chu: This work is supported in part by a research grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23 DK125670) to Dr David I. Chu. Ryan Spiardi: This work is supported in part by a research grant from NIH T32 research grants supporting Dr Ryan Spiardi (NIH 5T32DK7006-48 & NIH 5T32DK7006-49). None of the other authors have any financial interests to disclose. Funding Support: This work is supported in part by a research grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K23 DK125670) to Dr David I. Chu as well as NIH T32 research grants supporting Dr Ryan Spiardi (NIH 5T32DK7006-48 & NIH 5T32DK7006-49). The NIH/NIDDK had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; and preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript. The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official view of the NIH/NIDDK.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Urology