SynthesisUrological research2012
Urgent ureteroscopy as first-line treatment for ureteral stones: a meta-analysis of 681 patients.
Synthesis in Urological research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparing Tamsulosin vs. Silodosin prior to Ureteroscopy: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Urgent shock wave lithotripsy as first-line treatment for ureteral stones: a meta-analysis of 570 patients.Urological research · 2012Pooled it
- Work absence and productivity loss of patients undergoing a trial of spontaneous passage for ureteral stones.Urolithiasis · 2024Article
- Urgent ureterorenoscopy as a primary treatment for ureteral stone: why not?Urolithiasis · 2024Article
- Success rate and complications of performing elective ureteroscopy in <1 week versus over 1 week from renal colic initiation in ureteral stones larger than 6 mm.Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences · 2024Article
- Primary Ureteroscopy without Pre-Stenting for Proximal Ureteral Stones-Is It Feasible?Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- Emergency Primary Ureteroscopy for Acute Ureteric Colic-From Guidelines to Practice.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Primary Definitive Treatment versus Ureteric Stenting in the Management of Acute Ureteric Colic: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Determining whether previous SWL for ureteric stones influences the results of ureteroscopy as the second-line treatment: A clinical study.Experimental and therapeutic medicine · 2022Article
- Emergency vs elective ureteroscopy for a single ureteric stone.Arab journal of urology · 2020Article
- Acute care for renal colic in Canadian healthcare - a commentary on emergency department patient flow metrics and treatment options.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2020Article
- Early ureteroscopic lithotripsy in acute renal colic caused by ureteral calculi.International urology and nephrology · 2020Article
- Primary versus deferred ureteroscopy for management of calculus anuria: a prospective randomized study.Central European journal of urology · 2018Article
- Emergent versus delayed lithotripsy for obstructing ureteral stones: a cumulative analysis of comparative studies.Urolithiasis · 2017Article
- The Gachon University Ureteral Narrowing score: A comprehensive standardized system for predicting necessity of ureteral dilatation to treat proximal ureteral calculi.Investigative and clinical urology · 2016Article
- Evolving Guidance on Ureteric Calculi Management in the Acute Setting.Current urology reports · 2016Review
- Acute management of stones: when to treat or not to treat?World journal of urology · 2015Review
- Cross-sectional imaging of iatrogenic complications after extracorporeal and endourological treatment of urolithiasis.Insights into imaging · 2014Article
- Factors predicting success of emergency extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (eESWL) in ureteric calculi--a single centre experience from the United Kingdom (UK).Urolithiasis · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
There are various recent studies on the use of ureteroscopy and debate on whether this should be the first-line treatment for patients with ureteral stones. The aim of this meta-analysis was to understand the role of this surgical procedure in the emergency setting as first-line treatment and to compare the immediate procedure with a delayed one in terms of stone-free rate and complications. A bibliographic search covering the period from January 1980 to March 2010 was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE. This analysis is based on the six studies found that fulfilled the predefined inclusion criteria. A total of 681 participants were included. The number of participants in each of the studies considered ranged from 27 to 244 (mean 113). Stone-free rates were 81.9% (72.0-91.8) for the proximal ureter, 87.3% (82.6-92.0) for the mid-ureter, 94.9% (92.1-97.6) for the distal ureter and 89.5% (86.5-92.5) overall according to the logistic regression applied. These values are not statistically significantly different from those reported in the AUA and EAU guidelines. The stone diameter seems to affect the stone-free rate. An increase of the stone diameter of 1 mm beyond 8 mm corresponded to a reduction of stone-free rate of 5% (2.4-8.0) and 8.1% (3.8-12.1) for the distal and proximal ureters, respectively. There is a complete lack of information in international guidelines on the ureteroscopic management of ureteral stones in an emergency setting and the currently available results are dispersed in a few studies in the literature. The rationale for using emergency ureteroscopy is more rapid stone clearance and relief from colic pain. According to our meta-analysis, immediate ureteroscopy for ureteral stone colic seems to be a safe treatment with a high success rate. This evidence will be validated by further randomized studies, with larger series of patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22367457What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.