SynthesisPloS one2018
Use of the ureteral access sheath during ureteroscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 5 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
37 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Utilization of Ureteral Access Sheath in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Pooled it
- International Alliance of Urolithiasis guideline on retrograde intrarenal surgery.BJU international · 2023Guideline
- Role of pre-operative ureteral stent on outcomes of retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS): systematic review and meta-analysis of 3831 patients and comparison of Asian and non-Asian cohorts.World journal of urology · 2022Pooled it
- Retrograde intrarenal surgery with or without ureteral access sheath: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyPooled it
- Efficacy of 6. 3Fr disposable digital flexible ureteroscope versus 7. 5Fr disposable digital flexible ureteroscope in the treatment of upper urinary tract stones < 1. 5 cm: a randomized controlled trial.World journal of urology · 2025Trial
- Ureteral access sheath or percutaneous nephrostomy during flexible ureteroscopy: which is better?Urolithiasis · 2025Trial
- Effect of bladder emptying status on the ureteral access sheath insertion resistance and following ureteral injury in RIRS: a prospective randomized controlled trial in academic hospital.World journal of urology · 2023Trial
- Effect of ureteric access sheath on outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery for renal stone disease: a randomized controlled trial.World journal of urology · 2023Trial
- Is the direct in-scope suction (DISS) the solution for the non-prestenting and sheathless flexible ureteroscopy?International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Impact of Ureteral Access Sheath Use on Renal Stone Clearance During Flexible Ureterorenoscopy: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Procedural factors outweigh anatomical morphometry in predicting postoperative pain following retrograde intrarenal surgery.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Suction Ureteral Access Sheaths During Flexible Ureteroscopy for Renal Stones: A Prospective Study and Cost Analysis.Cureus · 2025Article
- Does the ureteral access sheath reduce infections in previously drained sepsis patients?World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Does the use of a ureteral access sheath improve perioperative outcomes in ureteroscopy? A real-world multi-institutional study.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Status study of clinical application of ureteral access sheath in urology: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Review
- Outcomes of ureteroscopy and laser lithotripsy with and without ureteral access sheaths for the treatment of renal calculi: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Central European journal of urology · 2025Review
- Influence of pre-stenting on flexible and navigable suction (FANS) access sheath outcomes. Results of a prospective multicentre study by the EAU Section of Endourology and the global FANS collaborative group.Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
- To sheath or not to sheath in flexible ureteroscopy: A randomized controlled trial.Arab journal of urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The debate still rages on for the usefulness of ureteral access sheath (UAS). Therefore, a meta-analysis to discuss the effects of applying UAS during ureteroscopy was performed. The protocol for the review is available on PROSPERO (CRD42017052327). A literature search was conducted up to November, 2017 using the Web of science, PUBMED, EMBASE and Cochrane Library. The quality of articles was assessed by the Jadad scale and Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS). Egger's test and the trim-and-fill method were used to evaluate publication bias. Effect sizes were calculated by pooled odds ratio (ORs) and mean differences (MDs). Sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses were performed to explore the origin of heterogeneity. Eight trials with a total of 3099 patients and 3127 procedures were identified. Results showed no significant difference in stone-free rate (SFR) (OR = 0.83, 95% CI 0.52-1.33, P = 0.45), intraoperative complications (OR = 1.16, 95% CI 0.81-7.69, P = 0.88), operative time (MD = 4.09, 95% CI -15.08-23.26, P = 0.68) and hospitalization duration (MD = -0.13, 95% CI -0.32-0.06, P = 0.18). However, the incidence of postoperative complications was higher in UAS group (OR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.06-2.00, P = 0.02). Evidence from meta-analysis indicated that the use of UAS during ureteroscopy did not manifest advantages. However, given the intrinsic restrictions of the quality of selected articles, more randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are warranted to update the findings of this analysis.
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.