Evidence Hub

Efficacy and safety of ureteral stenting in kidney transplant: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Cristiano Araújo Costa, Odeon Parente Aguiar, Francisco Jazon de Araújo, Frank Robisom Costa De Sousa

BJN Abstract-CPN25, 2025

1,392 participants

Abstract

Introdução: Kidney transplantation (KT) is an excellent treatment option for patients with chronic kidney failure. In this context, the use of renal stents has been associated with improved nephrological and urological outcomes and may contribute to a reduction in long-term allograft loss. Recently, a randomized controlled trial (RCT) provided new insights into the benefits of stenting in transplant recipients. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to synthesize the available evidence and reduce uncertainties regarding the impact of this technique in KT.

Métodos: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library, for RCTs comparing stent group versus no stent group for kidney transplant postoperative management. The outcomes of interest were urinary leak, ureteral obstruction and urinary tract infection (UTI) rates. We pooled analysis of odds ratio (OD) with 95% confidence intervals applying a random-effects model and using Review Manager 5.4.1 for all statistical analyses.

Resultados: We included 9 RCTs comprising 1392 patients, 721 patients in the stent group and 671 patients in no stent group. The analysis showed that the stent group had fewer cases of urinary leak (OD = 0.23 [0.10 – 0.53]; p< 0.01; I² = 5%) and obstruction (OD = 0.27 [0.10 – 0.73]; p<0.05; I² = 0%). In contrast, the no stent group had lower rates of UTI (OD = 2.12 [1.08 – 4.17]; p<0.05; I² = 70%).

Discussão e Conclusões: Our findings provide new evidence that stenting during KT…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,392 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free