SynthesisWorld journal of urology2017
Uncovering the real outcomes of active renal stone treatment by utilizing non-contrast computer tomography: a systematic review of the current literature.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of endoscopic evaluation of stone-free status at the end of retrograde intrarenal surgery. Should we trust ourselves? Prospective data over 5 years from a referral stone centre.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Local delivery of vasodilators for the reduction of ureteral contractions: limited but promising.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Future of kidney stone surgery: will we treat small stones with large-sized PCNL and big stones with RIRS?World journal of urology · 2020Article
- Laser fibre, rather than the stone, may harm the scope: retrospective monocentric analysis of 26 pre- and intraoperative factors of flexible ureteroscope (fURS) damage.World journal of urology · 2020Article
- Early ureteroscopic lithotripsy in acute renal colic caused by ureteral calculi.International urology and nephrology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the stone-free rates (SFRs) and stone clearance rates (SCRs) of extracorporeal shock-wave lithotripsy (SWL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), and percutaneous nephrolitholapaxy (PCNL) according to non-contrast computer tomography (NCCT) findings.
methodsOriginal articles were identified from PubMed. After exclusion of ineligible papers, twenty-three studies with 2494 cases were included in the review.
resultsSix SWL, five RIRS and eight PCNL studies were selected. Additionally, four comparative articles were identified. SWL presents SFRs ranging 35-61.3 % and SCRs for residuals <4 mm being 43.2-92.9 %. RIRS studies report SFRs of 34.8-59.7 % and SCRs for residuals <4 mm ranging 48-96.7 %. Finally, PCNL presents SFRs of 20.8-100 % and SCRs for residuals <4 mm being 41.5-91.4 %. According to the comparative studies, SFRs are 17-61.3 % for SWL, 50 % for RIRS, and 95-100 % for PCNL.
conclusionsAccording to NCCT findings, it seems that PCNL provides better SFRs than ESWL and RIRS. However, further research with comparable and complete preoperative parameters and outcomes could reduce the heterogeneity of current data.
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.