ArticleJournal of pediatric surgery2020
What predicts spontaneous passage of ≤1 cm ureteral stones in children?
Article in Journal of pediatric surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ureteroscopy in pediatric urolithiasis: techniques, challenges, and outcomes.World journal of urology · 2025Review
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study is to determine what factors predict spontaneous passage of ≤1 cm ureteral stones in children.
methodsFiles of the patients diagnosed with a single ureteral stone on a given side between 2008 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with congenital obstructive uropathy, neurogenic bladder, vesicoureteral reflux and those with a stone diameter of >1 cm were excluded. Detection of ureteral stones was done using ultrasonography (US) primarily, and computed tomography when US findings were inconclusive. Patients were treated either conservatively or surgically. Conservative treatment included adequate hydration and pain management whereas surgical treatment included ureteroscopic intervention. Apart from those who required urgent intervention, patients were referred for surgical treatment after 2-4 weeks of follow-up with no spontaneous passage. Factors analyzed for association of spontaneous passage included age, gender, type of hematuria, stone localization, laterality, presence of concomitant kidney stone, degree of hydronephrosis, stone size and stone composition.
resultsA total of 70 patients (38 males, 32 females); median age 4.7 years had a ≤ 1 cm ureteral stone (median diameter 7 mm). US was able to diagnose the ureteric stone in 47 patients while computed tomography was required in 23 patients. Spontaneous passage was observed in 40 patients (57.1%). Median time for stone passage was 8 days (3-34 days). Stone size and presence of hematuria (macroscopic and microscopic combined) were factors associated with spontaneous passage and 6.7 mm was found to be the cut-off (AUC = 0.953; 95% CI 0.905-1.000; sensitivity 96.7%, specificity 82.5%, p < 0.001). Moreover, age, degree of hydronephrosis or stone location were not associated with spontaneous passage.
conclusionPatients with a ureteric stone size <6.7 mm can safely be followed conservatively, with a spontaneous passage rate of 82.5%. Type of Study Case series with no comparison group. Level of Evidence IV.
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.