ArticleBMC urology2020
Comparative analysis of retrograde intrarenal surgery and modified ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy in management of lower pole renal stones (1.5-3.5 cm).
Article in BMC urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07012941 (An Application of Super-pulsed TFL vs Ho), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 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.
An Application of Super-pulsed TFL vs Ho:YAG Laser in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Upper Ureter and Renal Stones: A Multi-center Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does displacement of lower pole stones during retrograde intrarenal surgery improves stone-free status? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Acta cirurgica brasileira · 2023Pooled it
- Is physical therapy effective following extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review.BMC urology · 2020Pooled it
- RIRS vs PCNL in treating lower-pole renal stones: a comparative clinical outcome study.Future science OA · 2026Article
- Clinical advantages of suctioning flexible ureteroscopy with intelligent pressure control on treating large upper urinary tract calculi.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy with flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy for the treatment of impacted upper ureteral stones: a retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Assessment of Factors Responsible for Stone-Free Status After Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery.Cureus · 2024Article
- In the Treatment of Lower Pole Kidney Stones Between 1-2 cm in Children, Which is the Best Approach? Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery or Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2024Article
- Flexible ureteroscopy for lower pole calculus: is it still a challenge?World journal of urology · 2023Review
- Treatment of 2-4 cm kidney stones: multicentre experience. Comparison of safety, efficacy, and costs of percutaneous nephrolithotomy and retrograde intrarenal surgery.Central European journal of urology · 2023Article
- Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment for renal calculi larger than 2 cm: a matched-pair analysis.Urolithiasis · 2022Article
- Comparison of Ultra-Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Renal Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis from the KSER Update Series.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Can mini PCNL achieve the same results as RIRS? The initial single center experience.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2021Article
- Stone-free rate of laser lithotripsy for large pediatric stones: 15-year experience from a tertiary endourology pediatric center.Therapeutic advances in urologyArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo compare the safety and efficacy of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and modified Ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMP) in semi-supine combined lithotomy position for the management of 1.5-3.5 cm lower pole renal stones (LPSs).
methodsA total of 63 patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs who underwent RIRS (n = 33) or modified UMP (n = 30) in diameter between January 2017 and January 2019 were analyzed retrospectively. Modified UMP was performed in semi-supine combined lithotomy position and a 9.5/11.5 F ureteral access sheath (UAS) was inserted during the procedure in order to maintain low pelvic pressure and to facilitate the removal of stone fragments. Base-line parameters, stone characteristics, illness condition, operation time, postoperative hemoglobin (Hb) drop, postoperative creatinine (Cr) elevation, length of hospital stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, stone-free rate (SFR) and complications were compared between the two groups.
resultsThere were no significant differences between the two groups in base-line parameters, stone characteristics and illness condition. The mean operating time of RIRS group was longer than UMP group (95.61 ± 21.9 vs. 55.0 ± 16.1 min, p < 0.001). The mean postoperative Hb drop was less in RIRS group (7.42 ± 4.7 vs. 15.70 ± 9.8 g/L, p < 0.001). The length of hospital stay and postoperative hospital stay for RIRS were shorter than UMP (4.76 ± 1.1 vs. 5.83 ± 0.8 d, p < 0.001, 2.97 ± 0.9 vs. 4.07 ± 0.9 d, p < 0.001). The Early SFR was higher in UMP group (54.5 vs. 80.0%, p < 0.050) while SFR at 1-month and 3-months postoperatively was similar in both groups (p = 0.504, p = 0.675). There were no significant differences between the two groups in complications (p = 0.228).
conclusionFor patients with 1.5-3.5 cm LPSs, both modified UMP and RIRS are safe and viable. The modified UMP technique was used in this study, application semi-supine combined lithotomy position and the retention of UAS can improve the surgical efficiency and maintain low pressure perfusion in the kidney, which resulted in superior treatment efficacy. Therefore, we highly recommend this technique for LPSs with heavy stone burdens.
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.