SynthesisUrolithiasis2016
Comparison of laparoscopic stone surgery and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of large upper urinary stones: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Urolithiasis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of various surgical treatments for proximal ureteral stone ≥10mm: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyPooled it
- Comparison of retrograde ıntrarenal surgery performed with thulium fiber laser lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of 20-30 mm kidney stones in adults: a randomized prospective study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Trial
- The clinical efficacy of novel semirigid ureteroscopy with a vacuum suction device for treatment of >10 mm upper ureteral stones and impacted calculus: implications for clinical practice.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- The optimal management of large upper ureteral stones (> 1.5 cm) with infection in elderly patients: a comparative analysis of three minimally invasive surgical approaches.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Laparoscopic ureterolithotomy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large proximal ureteral stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2023Article
- Suctioning semirigid ureteroscopic lithotomy versus minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy for large upper ureteral stones: a retrospective study.Translational andrology and urology · 2021Article
- Postoperative Renal Outcomes of Patients Receiving Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy versus Pyelolithotomy: A Population-Based Cohort Study.BioMed research international · 2018Article
- Article
- Editorial Comment: Laparoscopic - assisted transpyelic rigid nephroscopy - simple alternative when flexible ureteroscopy is not available.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For the treatment of large upper urinary stones percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is generally considered the first choice, and Laparoscopic Stone Surgery (LSS) is an alternative. We aim to compare the efficiency and safety of PCNL with LSS, as far as the management of large upper urinary stones is concerned. A systematic search from Pubmed, Web of Science, Wiley Online Library and Elsevier was performed up to August 1, 2015 for the relevant published studies. After data extraction and quality assessment, meta-analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.3 software. 15 eligible trials evaluating LSS vs. PCNL were identified including 6 prospective and 9 retrospective studies with 473 patients undergoing LSS and 523 patients undergoing PCNL. Although LSS led to longer operative time (p = 0.01) and higher open conversion rate (p = 0.02), patients might benefit from significantly fewer overall complications (p = 0.03), especially lower bleeding rate (p = 0.02), smaller drop in hemoglobin level (p < 0.001), less need of blood transfusion (p = 0.01). The stone free rate was also higher for LSS compared with PCNL (p < 0.001) with less secondary/complementary procedure (p = 0.006). There was no significant difference in other demographic parameters between the two groups. Our data suggests that LSS turns out to be a safe and feasible alternative to PCNL for large upper urinary stones with less bleeding and higher stone free rate. Because of the inherent limitations of the included studies, further large sample prospective, multi-centric studies and randomized control trials should be undertaken to confirm our findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.