ArticleAsian journal of urology2015
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy in octogenarians and beyond: How old is too old?
Article in Asian journal of urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes following surgical management of urinary stone disease in older patients.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
- Supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients aged 80 years and older: a propensity score-matched evaluation of safety and efficacy.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Time-sensitive elements in elective treatment of urinary lithiasis: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Review
- Management of large kidney stones in the geriatric population.World journal of urology · 2023Review
- Active stone removal is a safe option for ocotogenarians and nonagenarians with nephrolithiasis.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Article
- Ureteroscopy and stone treatment in the elderly (≥70 years): prospective outcomes over 5- years with a review of literature.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo specifically report perioperative characteristics and outcomes in patients 80 years and older undergoing percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). PCNL has been established as feasible in the elderly; however, to our knowledge no one has specifically reported feasibility in patients 80 years and older.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed perioperative data of octogenarians who underwent PCNL at a high stone volume single institution, and matched them to patients <65 years of age by stone burden and sex. Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications were compared.
resultsThirty-three octogenarians (mean age 83.6 years) with 36 renal units were matched to 67 controls (mean age 48.6 years) with 72 renal units. Octogenarians had a higher mean American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, more comorbidities, and worse renal function. There were no differences in operative characteristics, length of hospital stay or stone free rates. Of the patients with preoperative urinary decompression (ureteral stent or nephrostomy tube) prior to PCNL, the elderly were more likely to have a history of urosepsis. Octogenarians did not experience more minor Clavien (I - II) or major Clavien (IIIa - IVb) complications.
conclusionOctogenarians who undergo PCNL were more likely to have cardiovascular comorbidities and a prior history of sepsis. Despite these risk factors, in appropriately selected patients PCNL can be safely and successfully performed in octogenarians without increased perioperative complications relative to a younger cohort.
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.