Incidence of kidney stones in pregnancy and associations with adverse obstetrical outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4.7 million pregnancies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Renal stones are a common cause of non-obstetrical abdominal pain in pregnant women. Though the management of renal stones in pregnancy is challenging, it remains unclear how the incidence of kidney stones may affect the course of pregnancy and delivery. To determine the incidence of renal stones in pregnancy and its impact on adverse obstetrical outcomes. We conducted a systematic literature search of three databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. After the selection of articles, an additional hand-search of their citations was completed to maximize sensitivity. Databases were examined from the last four decades (19 March 1970) up to the search date (19 March 2020). Articles were excluded if they were not relevant to kidney stones or did not report outcomes related to pregnancy. Case reports, animal studies, and cadaveric studies were excluded. Conference abstracts, gray literature, and unpublished data were not eligible. All screening, extraction, and synthesis were completed in duplicate with two independent reviewers. All outcomes reported in the included studies were systematically evaluated to determine suitability for meta-analysis. Random-effects models and sensitivity analyses were used to account for interstudy variation. Renal stone incidence rates were pooled to generate summary proportions. Risk of bias assessment was completed using the Risk of Bias Assessment tool for Non-randomized Studies. Twenty-one studies were included through systematic review and approximately 4.7 million pregnancies across nine studies were included for meta-analysis. There are three major findings of this review regarding renal stone incidence in pregnancy and maternal, child, and birth-related outcomes associated with renal stones. First, we found pooled incidence of renal stones was 0.49%, or one case for every 204 pregnancies. Second, renal stones during pregnancy were significantly associated with the development of preeclampsia and urinary tract infection, as well as increased likelihood of low birth weight, preterm labor, and C-section deliveries. However, renal stones were not significantly associated with premature rupture of membranes or infant mortality. Third, there were limited obstetrical complications reported with either medical or surgical therapies although comparative outcomes were not provided in the majority of studies, precluding formal meta-analysis. Although renal stones in pregnancy are relatively rare, there may be an associated risk of serious adverse obstetrical outcomes. However, further research is required to understand whether these obstetrical outcomes are causal or due to other confounders. Interdisciplinary care and pregnancy-specific counseling should be advised for pregnant women with kidney stones.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,017 | 0,038 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,020 | 0,042 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».