Evidence Hub

Meta-analysis of Androgen Insensitivity in Preoperative Hormone Therapy in Hypospadias

Zhao W, Yin J, Yang Z, Xie J, Zhang Y, Xu W, Li JL

Urology, 2015

306 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To define androgen insensitivity prevalence in hypospadias patients treated with preoperative hormone therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched databases that were published in English and Chinese up to September 10, 2014 for our studies. Eligibility criteria were pre-established. Title, abstract, and full-text screenings were conducted by 2 authors independently. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Quality assessment of included studies was completed. Meta-analysis was done when appropriate using R, version 3.1.1 for Windows. Heterogeneity among individual studies was tested using the Cochran chi-square Q test and quantified by calculating the I(2) index.

RESULTS: Thirteen of 1278 publications met inclusion criteria and were incorporated into this study. Of 306 patients with preoperative hormone therapy, 25 displayed androgen resistance. Meta-analysis demonstrated that the random-effects model generates a pooled estimate of 7.14% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.16%-15.31%), whereas the fixed-effect model provides an estimate of 14.61% (95% CI, 10.00%-20.85%). Heterogeneity among included studies was found above medium (I(2) = 67.1% [95% CI, 41.2%-81.6%]; P = .0003]. After exclusion of the heterogeneity, both random-effects and fixed-effect models produce a consistent pooled estimate of 6.95% (95% CI, 0%-47.8%).

CONCLUSION: We have defined that the prevalence of androgen resistance in hypospadias is 7.14% (95% CI, 3.16%-15.31%). To distinguish isolated…

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: 306 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