Trial reportUrolithiasis2020
When is the best time to perform external physical vibration lithecbole (EPVL) after retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS): a multi-center study based on randomized controlled trials.
Trial report in Urolithiasis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness and safety of external physical vibration lithecbole for upper urinary stone expulsion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Is physical therapy effective following extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.BMC urology · 2020Pooled it
- Efficacy of external physical vibration lithecbole combined with tamsulosin in upper ureteric stones after ESWL: a prospective randomized clinical trial.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Clinical study of the postural drainage lithotripsy system for the treatment of residual fragments after retrograde intrarenal surgery.World journal of urology · 2025Trial
- Relocation and evacuation of stone fragments using 7.5 Fr flexible ureteroscope with direct-in-scope suction: an experimental study.Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
- For upper ureteral stone, semirigid ureteroscopy or flexible ureteroscopy? Strengths and weaknesses.BMC urology · 2024Article
- Effect of external physical vibration lithecbole in obese patients with lower pole stones <15 mm after ESWL: a single-centre, randomized, open label clinical trial.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Article
- The effect of percussion, diuresis and inversion therapy on RIRS success for lower renal pole stones.Central European journal of urology · 2023Article
- Technique, Feasibility, Utility, Limitations, and Future Perspectives of a New Technique of Applying Direct In-Scope Suction to Improve Outcomes of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Stones.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Fibrin gel-assisted stone extraction in retrograde intrarenal surgery.BJU international · 2022Article
- A single center study that evaluates the preclinical use of a newly developed software and moving bed system to facilitate the spontaneous excretion of residual fragments after primary stone treatment (RIRS or PCNL).World journal of urology · 2022Article
- Effective and quick discharge of residual fragments after minimal invasive stone procedures with "EPVL" modality: a new and promising approach.Urolithiasis · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To determine the best time to perform EPVL treatment by evaluating the efficacy and safety of active stone extraction in treating residual fragments at different time points after RIRS. All participants had renal or upper ureteral stones preoperatively and still had residual stones after receiving RIRS. They were prospectively randomized into four groups: patients in group A received EPVL 3 days after RIRS; patients in group B received EPVL 7 days after RIRS; patients in group C received EPVL 14 days after RIRS; patients in group D did not receive EPVL after RIRS. Follow-up examinations were performed on all participants. The results, including stone size and location, stone-free rate (SFR) and complications, were compared among the groups. There were 176 patients in total. The SFR in groups A, B, C and D were 62.22%, 40.91%, 14.28% and 11.11%, respectively, 7 days after RIRS. At 14 days after RIRS, the SFR was 80%, 59.09%, 42.86% and 26.67% in groups A, B, C and D, respectively. At 28 days after RIRS, the SFR was 91.11%, 84.09%, 76.19% and 51.11% in groups A, B, C and D, respectively. Group A had the highest SFR from 7 to 28 days, and group C had a higher SFR at 28 days after RIRS than group D (P < 0.05). The side effects were less in groups A and B than in group D 28 days after RIRS (P < 0.05). We recommended that the best time to perform EPVL is 3 days after RIRS, because it could achieve a high SFR at any point in time and reduced complications.
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.