ArticleUrolithiasis2021
Factors affecting success in the treatment of proximal ureteral stones larger than 1 cm with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in adult patients.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measuring and analyzing objective factors of impacted ureteral stones on Non-Contrast Computed Tomography (NCCT): a retrospective case-control study.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- Pathological and radiological evaluation of ureteral wall thickness measurement in urolithiasis.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Risk factors and prediction model for stone mucosa adhesion before retrograde intrarenal surgery.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025Article
- Advancing decision-making in shock wave lithotripsy for upper ureteral stones: the role of radiological stone impaction markers.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Predicting ESWL success for ureteral stones: a radiomics-based machine learning approach.BMC medical imaging · 2025Article
- CT-based deep learning model for predicting the success of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy in treating ureteral stones larger than 1 cm.Urolithiasis · 2024Article
- CT-based radiomics for predicting success of shock wave lithotripsy in ureteral stones larger than 1 cm.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Factors influencing the efficacy of ultrasound-guided extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of ureteral stones: a retrospective study.Urolithiasis · 2023Article
- Place of extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy in the treatment of urolithiasis in the region of Gharb Chrarda Bni Hssen (Morocco).Urolithiasis · 2023Article
- Machine Learning Models for Predicting the Type and Outcome of Ureteral Stones Treatments.Advanced biomedical research · 2023Article
- Predicting narrow ureters before ureteroscopic lithotripsy with a neural network: a retrospective bicenter study.Urolithiasis · 2022Article
- Retrograde intrarenal surgery for impacted upper ureteral stone in a patient with advanced lumbar scoliosis and lower-extremity development defect: a case report.Journal of medical case reports · 2022Article
- Laser lithotripsy for proximal ureteral calculi in adults: can 3D CT texture analysis help predict treatment success?European radiology · 2021Article
- The utility of automated volume analysis of renal stones before and after shockwave lithotripsy treatment.Urolithiasis · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to analyze the factors predicting success for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones larger than 1 cm with extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) in adult patients. Between January 2014 and December 2018, 480 adult patients in total underwent SWL and data were retrospectively evaluated. Patients with multiple ureteral stones, solitary kidney, congenital abnormality, skeletal system abnormality, history of previous urinary system surgery and SWL, renal insufficiency, patients who could not tolerate SWL and pediatric patients were excluded from the study. The remaining 415 patients were divided into two groups as success (Group 1, n = 307) and failure (Group 2, n = 108). The overall success rate was 73.9%. The values of stone size, Hounsfield Unit (HU), skin to stone distance (SSD), ureteral wall thickness (UWT), proximal ureter diameter, renal pelvis diameter, hydronephrosis grade, and duration of renal colic were significantly higher in Group 2 compared to Group 1. In binary logistic regression analyses, HU, UWT, and proximal ureter diameter were found to be independent predictors. HU, UWT, and proximal ureter diameter had sensitivity and specificity of 92-92%, 88-23%, and 87-46%, with cutoff values of 740 HU, 2.5 mm and 8.5 mm, respectively. The area under the curve values were 0.96, 0.97, and 0.96 for HU, UWT, and proximal ureter diameter, respectively. The CT-based parameters, including HU, UWT, and proximal ureter diameter are independent predictive factors with excellent accuracy for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones larger than 1 cm with SWL in adult patients. Based on these factors, SWL can be considered for proximal ureteral stones larger than 1 cm.
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.