Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28534536›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2017

Current clinical scoring systems of percutaneous nephrolithotomy outcomes.

Wayland J Wu, Zeph Okeke

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Predicting the Stone-Free Status of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with the Machine Learning System.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Study on risk factors, bacterial species, and drug resistance of acute pyelonephritis associated with ureteral stent after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Wayland J WuSmith Institute for Urology, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, 450 Lakeville Road, Suite M41, Lake Success, New York 11042, USA.
Zeph OkekeSmith Institute for Urology, Hofstra Northwell School of Medicine, 450 Lakeville Road, Suite M41, Lake Success, New York 11042, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy has become the preferred treatment modality for patients with large renal calculi. The technique provides excellent stone clearance, but complication rates are higher than those of minimally invasive techniques, such as ureteroscopy and shockwave lithotripsy. Guy's stone score, S.T.O.N.E. nephrolithometry, the CROES nomogram, and S-ReSC are contemporary scoring systems introduced to provide standardized grading of stone complexity and outcomes of percutaneous stone surgery. Guy's stone score is easy to apply and has been validated in multiple studies. The S.T.O.N.E. score is based on factors determined through CT imaging, which is the currently preferred imaging modality for patients with nephrolithiasis. The CROES nomogram was developed from data in a large multicentre database and has high statistical power. Determination of the S-ReSC score relies on stone location only, providing a simple approach to grading disease complexity. Each system has advantages and disadvantages, but several studies suggest that their ability to predict stone-free rate is comparable. The optimal system should have a high predictive ability, should be simple to use and should be widely applicable. Additional studies are required to evaluate patient clinical factors that influence stone complexity and are predictive of outcomes. A future unified scoring system might incorporate the strengths of each currently available system and optimize care of patients with nephrolithiasis.

Indexed as

Severity of Illness IndexHumansKidney CalculiNephrolithiasisNephrolithotomy, PercutaneousTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID28534536

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.