Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24419328›Full record

ArticleUrolithiasis2014

Incidence and risk factors of renal hematoma: a prospective study of 1,300 SWL treatments.

M J Schnabel, M Gierth, C G Chaussy, K Dötzer, M Burger, H M Fritsche

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Urolithiasis, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M J SchnabelDepartment of Urology, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany, marco.schnabel@ukr.de.
M Gierth
C G Chaussy
K Dötzer
M Burger
H M Fritsche
University of Regensburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is the gold standard for the treatment of upper urinary tract stones. Despite being relatively non-invasive, SWL can cause renal hematoma (RHT). The aim of this study was to determine incidence and risk factors for RHT following SWL. 857 patients were included in a prospectively maintained database. The observation period spans from 2007 to 2012. 1,324 procedures were performed due to kidney stones. Treatment protocol included power ramping and shock wave frequency of 60-90 per minute as well as an ultrasound check within 3 days of SWL for all patients. Patients with RHT were analyzed, and treatment characteristics were compared with the complete population in a non-statistical manner due to the low event count. RHTs after SWL, sized between 2.6 × 0.6 cm and 17 × 15 cm, were verified in seven patients (0.53%). In four patients, the RHT was asymptomatic. Three patients developed pain after SWL treatment due to a RHT. In one patient surgical intervention was necessary due to a symptomatic RHT, the kidney was preserved. The risk of RHT following SWL treatment of kidney stones is about 0.5%. Clinically relevant or symptomatic RHTs occur in 0.23%, RHTs requiring surgical intervention are extremely rare. Older age and vascular comorbidities appear to be risk factors for the development of RHT. The technical characteristics of SWL treatment and intake of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid due to an imperative cardiologic indication do not appear to influence the risk. Prospective studies are warranted.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirinComorbidityDatabases, FactualFemaleHematomaHumansIncidenceLithotripsyMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsUrolithiasisAnti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-SteroidalAspirin

Identifiers

PMID24419328
OpenAlexW2038278115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.