SynthesisBMC urology2019
Evaluation of three stone-scoring systems for predicting SFR and complications after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The predictive value of Mayo adhesive probability (MAP) score for perioperative outcomes in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluation of explainable machine learning models for predicting mid-term stone recurrence after percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a retrospective observational cohort study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Observational
- Comparative performance of five nephrolithometry scoring systems and a novel nomogram for predicting stone-free rate following pediatric percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence versus classical scoring systems: a comparative analysis of stone-free prediction after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- Comparative analysis of STONE, TOHO, and ITO stone scoring systems for predicting stone-free status following flexible ureteroscopy in patients with renal stones: a prospective study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- Review
- B.T.C.H. nephrolithometry score: a novel scoring system to predict stone-free rate and complexity for ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Stone-scoring systems for predicting complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy: A systematic review of the literature.Asian journal of urology · 2023Review
- Predicting radiation exposure during complete supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- A multicenter study on the application of artificial intelligence radiological characteristics to predict prognosis after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Predicting the Stone-Free Status of Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy with the Machine Learning System.International journal of nephrology and renovascular disease · 2023Article
- High stone-free rate immediately after suctioning flexible ureteroscopy with Intelligent pressure-control in treating upper urinary tract calculi.BMC urology · 2022Observational
- Can the Stone Scoring Systems Be Used to Predict Infective Complications of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery?Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2022Article
- A novel nomogram and a simple scoring system for urinary leakage after percutaneous nephrolithotomy.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundClinical studies assessing the feasibility and accuracy of three stone scoring systems's (SSSs: Guy's stone score, CROES nomogram and S.T.O.N.E nephrolithometry scoring system) have reported contradictory outcomes. This systematic evaluation was performed to obtain comprehensive evidence with regard to the feasibility and accuracy of three SSSs.
methodsA systematic search of Embase, Pubmed, Medline, and the Cochrane Library was conducted to identify studies that compared three SSSs up to Mar 2018. Patients were categorized according to stone free (SF) and no-stone free (NSF), Outcomes of interest included perioperative variables, stone-free rate (SFR), and complications.
resultsTen studies estimating three SSSs were included for meta-analysis. The results showed that SF patients had a significantly lower proportion of male (OR = 1.48, P = 0.0007), lower stone burden (WMD = -504.28, P < 0.0001), fewer No of involved calyces (OR = -1.23, P = 0.0007) and lower proportion of staghorn stone (OR = 0.33, P < 0.0001). Moreover, SF patients had significantly lower score of Guy score (WMD = -0.64, P < 0.0001), but, S.T.O.N.E. score (WMD = -1.23, P < 0.0001) and a higher score of CROES nomogram (WMD = 29.48, P = 0.003). However, the comparison of area under curves (AUC) of predicting SFR indicated that there was no remarkable difference between three SSSs. Nonetheless, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL (WMD = -0.29, 95% CI: - 0.57 to - 0.02, P = 0.03).
conclusionsOur meta-analysis indicated that the three SSSs were equally, feasible and accurate for predicting SFR after PCNL. However, Guy score was the only stone scoring system that predicted complications after PCNL.
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.