Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28152097›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2017

Minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy improves stone-free rates for impacted proximal ureteral stones: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Zi-Ming Gao, Shan Gao, Hong-Chen Qu, Kai Li, Ning Li, Chun-Lai Liu, Xing-Wang Zhu, Yi-Li Liu, Ping Wang, Xiao-Hua Zheng

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Influence of the "five‑in‑one" mode on complications and compliance behaviors of patients with ureteral calculi after minimally invasive surgery.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Impacted large ureteral stone: What is the best approach?International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Article
  7. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Zi-Ming GaoDepartment of Urological Surgery, Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Shan GaoDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Hong-Chen QuDepartment of Urological Surgery, Liaoning Cancer Hospital/China Medical University Cancer Hospital, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Kai LiDepartment of Oncology Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Ning LiDepartment of Urological Surgery, Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Chun-Lai LiuDepartment of Urological Surgery, Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Xing-Wang ZhuDepartment of Urological Surgery, Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Yi-Li LiuDepartment of Urological Surgery, Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Ping WangDepartment of Urological Surgery, Fourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
Xiao-Hua ZhengDepartment of Cardre Ward, No. 202 Hospital of People's Liberation Army, Shenyang, Liaoning, P.R. China.
China Medical University · CNFourth Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University · CNPeople's Liberation Army 401 Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary stones are common medical disorders and the treatment of impacted proximal ureteral stones (IPUS) is still a challenge for urologists. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (MI-PCNL) and ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URL) in the treatment of IPUS via a meta-analysis.

methodsWe collected studies using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from 1978 to November 2016 and analyzed them using Stata 12.0 and RevMan 5.3. Odds ratios (ORs) and standard mean difference (SMD) were calculated for binary and continuous variables respectively, accompanied with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All study procedures followed the PRISMA guidelines.

resultsFive prospective studies were included in our meta-analysis, with 242 MI-PCNL and 256 URL cases. MI-PCNL was associated with a longer postoperative hospital stay than URL (SMD, 3.14; 95% CI, 1.27 to 5.55). However, no significant difference was observed in operative time (SMD, -0.38; 95% CI, -3.15 to 2.38). In addition, MI-PCNL had higher initial (OR, 11.12; 95% CI, 5.56 to 22.24) and overall stone-free rates (OR, 8.70; 95% CI, 3.23 to 23.45) than URL, along with lower possibilities of surgical conversion (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.49) and postoperative shock wave lithotripsy (OR, 0.06; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.18). Regarding complications, no significant differences were observed between MI-PCNL and URL (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.93 to 2.10), except for hematuria (OR, 4.80; 95% CI, 1.45 to 15.94).

conclusionsMI-PCNL is optimal and should be considered as the preferred treatment method for IPUS, as it has better efficacy and a safety profile similar to that of URL. However, further high quality studies with larger sample size are required in future.

Indexed as

HumansMinimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresNephrostomy, PercutaneousTreatment OutcomeUreteral Calculi

Identifiers

PMID28152097
PMCPMC5289591
OpenAlexW2585963799

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.