Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25822707›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of urology2015

Retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy in comparison with ureteroscopic lithotripsy in the management of impacted upper ureteral stones larger than 12 mm.

Yuan Shao, Da-wei Wang, Guo-liang Lu, Zhou-jun Shen

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
2.9field-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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Treatment strategies for large impacted upper ureteral stones.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2016
    Article
  19. Ureteral strictures postureteroscopy: Can we predict or avoid this catastrophic complication?Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Yuan ShaoDepartment of Urology, Ruijin Hospital North, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, 999 Xiwang Road, Shanghai, 201801, People's Republic of China. shaoyuan15@hotmail.com.
Da-wei WangDepartment of Urology, Ruijin Hospital North, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, 999 Xiwang Road, Shanghai, 201801, People's Republic of China.
Guo-liang LuDepartment of Urology, Ruijin Hospital North, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, 999 Xiwang Road, Shanghai, 201801, People's Republic of China.
Zhou-jun ShenDepartment of Urology, Ruijin Hospital North, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiaotong University, 999 Xiwang Road, Shanghai, 201801, People's Republic of China.
Ruijin Hospital · CNShanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the results of ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) with retroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomy (RPLU) as two minimally invasive techniques in the management of proximal ureteral stones larger than 12 mm. PATIENTS AND

methodsFrom January 2009 to October 2013, patients with impacted unilateral upper ureteral stones larger than 12 mm were enrolled including 182 males and 93 females with a medium age of 40 years (22-72 years). Patients were randomized to receive URSL (139 cases) with semirigid ureteroscope or RPLU (136 cases).

resultsStone size was similar in RPLU and URSL groups (13.8 ± 1.9 vs 13.6 ± 1.4 mm, P = 0.312). Operating time and hospitalizing days in URSL group were significantly shorter than those in RPLU group (P < 0.001), whereas stone clearance rate was significantly higher in RPLU group (97.1 vs 89.9 %, P = 0.017). Ureteral strictures happened higher in URSL group (5 patients, 3.6 %) than RPLU group (2 patients, 1.5 %) with no statistical significance, while the strictures requiring surgical intervention were significantly higher in URSL group (4 cases) (2.9 vs 0 %, P = 0.046).

conclusionRPLU could provide better stone clearance rate than semirigid URSL for upper ureteral impacted stones larger than 12 mm. It may also reduce the chance of surgical intervention for postoperative ureteral stricture.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCause of DeathChinaFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLaparoscopyLithotripsyMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimePostoperative ComplicationsRetroperitoneal SpaceRetrospective StudiesSeverity of Illness IndexImpacted stoneRetroperitoneal laparoscopic ureterolithotomyUpper ureteral stoneUreteral strictureUreteroscopic lithotripsy

Identifiers

PMID25822707
OpenAlexW2032737829

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.