SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2019
Ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent for ureteroscopy in the management of renal and ureteral calculi.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 2 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
47 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent for ureteroscopy in the management of renal and ureteral calculi.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Tolerability of 4.7Fr versus 6Fr ureteral stents following intracorporeal lithotripsy: a single center, patient- and assessor-blinded randomized controlled trial.World journal of urology · 2026Trial
- Prospective randomized trial comparing mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of medium-sized high-density renal stones.International urology and nephrology · 2026Trial
- Patients undergoing double J substitution with a pigtail suture stent report a significant decrease of stent-related symptoms. Results from a prospective multicenter longitudinal trial.World journal of urology · 2024Trial
- Flexible Ureteroscopy and Nephroscopy for Stone Removal in Patients with Multiple Renal Calculi.Disease markers · 2022Trial
- A randomized prospective study: assessment of transient ureteral stenting by mono-J insertion after primary URS and stone extraction (FaST 3).Urolithiasis · 2021Trial
- Striking a balance: outcomes of short-term Mono-J placement following ureterorenoscopy.Urolithiasis · 2021Trial
- The impact of intraoperative ureteral stent omission on postoperative complications during radical cystectomy.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Randomized, multicenter trial of ureteral stent placement vs. stent omission after ureteroscopy for renal stones.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Article
- Review
- Patient satisfaction and scope size of flexible ureteroscopy for upper urinary stones: A comparative study, multivariate analysis and subjective and objective evaluations.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Ureteric stenting after uncomplicated ureteroscopy: a systematic review of surgeons' motivations and patient experiences.BJU international · 2026Article
- Management of acute pyelonephritis in pregnancy in emergency settings: A comparative study of conservative therapy and renal drainage.Journal of education and health promotion · 2026Article
- Article
- The effect of indwelling duration of ureteral stent on the formation and pathological characteristics of ureteral stricture after holmium laser thermal injury.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Can flexible ureteroscopy using flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath (FANS-UAS) minimize postoperative double J stent placement? Results from a propensity score-matched analysis of 540 patients of the European Association of Urology Section of Endourology and global FANS collaborative study group.Investigative and clinical urology · 2025Article
- Comprehensive surgical strategy for incarcerated ureteral calculi in the context of double renal pelvis malformations: A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2025Article
- Intelligent Ureteral Stent Placeable via Standard Procedure for Kidney Pressure Telemetry: An Ex-Vivo Study.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Single-J versus double-J stents after ureterorenoscopy for renal stones: A randomized comparison of safety and tolerability.Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUreteroscopy combined with laser stone fragmentation and basketing is a common approach for managing renal and ureteral stones. This procedure is associated with some degree of ureteral trauma. Ureteral trauma may lead to swelling, ureteral obstruction, and flank pain and may require subsequent interventions such as hospital admission or secondary ureteral stent placement. To prevent such issues, urologists often place temporary ureteral stents prophylactically, but the value of doing so remains unclear.
objectivesTo assess the effects of postoperative ureteral stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy. SEARCH
methodsWe performed a comprehensive search using multiple databases (the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, and Web of Science), trials registries, other sources of grey literature, and conference proceedings, up to 01 February 2019. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included trials in which researchers randomised participants undergoing uncomplicated ureteroscopy to placement of a ureteral stent versus no ureteral stent. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies. We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) according to the GRADE approach. MAIN
resultsPrimary outcomesStenting may slightly reduce the number of unplanned return visits (16 trials with 1970 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Pain on the day of surgery as measured on a visual analogue scale (scale 0 to 10; higher values reflect more pain) is probably similar (mean difference (MD) 0.32 higher, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 lower to 0.78 higher; 4 trials with 346 participants; moderate CoE). Pain on postoperative days 1 to 3 may show little to no difference (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.25 higher, 95% CI 0.32 lower to 0.82 higher; 8 trials with 683 participants; low CoE). On postoperative days 4 to 30, stented participants may experience more pain (8 trials with 903 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Stenting may result in little to no difference in the need for secondary interventions (risk ratio (RR) 1.15, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.33; 10 studies with 1435 participants; low CoE); this corresponds to three more interventions per 1000 participants (95% CI 13 fewer to 48 more).Secondary outcomesStenting may reduce the need for narcotics (7 trials with 830 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Rates of urinary tract infection (UTI) up to 90 days are probably not substantially different (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.51; 10 trials with 1207 participants; moderate CoE); this corresponds to three fewer infections per 1000 participants (95% CI 23 fewer to 29 more).Ureteral stricture rates up to 90 days may be slightly reduced (14 trials with 1625 participants; very low CoE), but we are very uncertain of this finding.Rates of hospital admission may be slightly reduced (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.32 to 1.55; 13 studies with 1647 participants; low CoE). This corresponds to 15 fewer admissions per 1000 participants (95% CI 33 fewer to 27 more). AUTHORS'
conclusionsFindings of this review illustrate the trade-offs of risks and benefits faced by urologists and their patients when it comes to decision-making about stent placement after uncomplicated ureteroscopy for stone disease. We noted that both desirable and undesirable effects were small in absolute terms, with findings based mostly on low and very low CoE. The main issues reducing our confidence in research findings were study limitations (mostly risk of performance and detection bias) and imprecision. We were unable to conduct any of the preplanned subgroup analyses, in particular those based on stone size, stone location, and use of ureteral dilation, which may be important effect modifiers. Given the importance of this question, higher-quality and sufficiently large trials are needed to better inform decision-making.
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.