ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2016
Is it necessary to actively remove stone fragments during retrograde intrarenal surgery?
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes between dusting and fragmentation in retrograde intrarenal surgery.BMC urology · 2023Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Thulium fiber laser vs Ho:YAG in RIRS: a prospective randomized clinical trial assessing the efficacy of lasers and different fiber diameters (150 µm and 200 µm).World journal of urology · 2023Trial
- Comparison of dusting and fragmentation methods in the flexible ureteroscopic treatment of kidney lower calyx stones.Urolithiasis · 2022Trial
- Head-to-head comparison of novel suction technologies in endourology: suction mini-PCNL versus flexible ureteroscopy using flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths for renal stone management. An EAU-endourology, propensity score-matched analysis of 1372 patients.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Lasing strategy and its influence on 30-day operative outcomes in flexible ureteroscopy with FANS: inferences from a real-world prospective multicenter study by EAU-endourology and AUSET.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Indications, preferences, global practice patterns and outcomes in retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones in adults: results from a multicenter database of 6669 patients of the global FLEXible ureteroscopy Outcomes Registry (FLEXOR).World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Comparison and outcomes of dusting versus stone fragmentation and extraction in retrograde intrarenal surgery: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.Central European journal of urology · 2022Review
- Prospective Single-Center Study of SuperPulsed Thulium Fiber Laser in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Initial Clinical Data.Urologia internationalis · 2022Article
- Consultation on kidney stones, Copenhagen 2019: aspects of intracorporeal lithotripsy in flexible ureterorenoscopy.World journal of urology · 2021Review
- Efficacy of one-surgeon basketing technique for stone extraction during flexible ureteroscopy for urolithiasis.Arab journal of urology · 2021Article
- Dusting versus fragmentation for renal stones during flexible ureteroscopy.Arab journal of urology · 2019Article
- Stone-breaking and retrieval strategy during retrograde intrarenal surgery.Investigative and clinical urology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeBased on the experiences of our center, we sought to verify the necessity of actively removing stones during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for the management of renal stones. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom March 2010 to March 2015, 248 patients underwent RIRS at our center. We classified these patients into 2 groups according to the performance of active stone removal; group A (n=172) included the patients whose stones were actively removed using a stone basket, and group B (n=76) included the patients whose stones were fragmented with laser lithotripsy without active removal of the fragments. We retrospectively compared the operation time, success rate, and complication rate between the 2 groups.
resultsThere were no significant differences between groups A and B in terms of mean age (56.1 years vs. 58.6 years), male to female ratio (115:57 vs. 46:30), mean body mass index (24.5 kg/m(2) vs. 25.0 kg/m(2)), mean preoperative size of stone (11.1 mm vs. 11.1 mm), the ratio of unilateral and bilateral stones (136:36 vs. 64:12), success rate (89.0% vs. 86.8%), operation time (82.5 minutes vs. 82.1 minutes), overall complication rate (9.9% vs. 11.8%), incidence of febrile urinary tract infection (6.4% vs. 2.6%), gross hematuria (1.7% vs. 2.6%), or postoperative de novo hydronephrosis (2.9% vs. 5.3%).
conclusionsThis study demonstrated that during RIRS, fragmentation only, without the active removal of stones, is a safe and effective technique in which the surgical outcomes are comparable to those of procedures involving the active removal of stones.
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.