ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2021
Analysis of performance factors in 240 consecutive cases of robot-assisted flexible ureteroscopic stone treatment.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06660914 (A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Robotic Flexible Ureteroscopy With Standard Flexible Ureteroscopy for Treatment of Renal Stones - A Pilot Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 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.
A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Robotic Flexible Ureteroscopy With Standard Flexible Ureteroscopy for Treatment of Renal Stones - A Pilot Study
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Surgical outcomes of robotic surgery for kidney stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis from section of YAU and EAU endourology.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Magnetically actuated microrobots in urolithiasis: emerging frontiers in kidney stone diagnosis and management.Inflammopharmacology · 2026Review
- Shaft stiffness heterogeneity in single-use flexible ureteroscopes: implications for maneuverability and robotic applications.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Comment on: "Surgical outcomes of robotic surgery for kidney stones: a systematic review and meta-analysis from section of YAU and EAU endourology".World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Review
- Optimizing outcome reporting after robotic flexible ureteroscopy for management of renal calculi: Introducing the concept of tetrafecta.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- First prospective clinical assessment of the ILYWorld journal of urology · 2024Article
- Feasibility of multi-section continuum robotic ureteroscope in the kidney.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Cystine Stones: Developments in Minimally Invasive Surgery and Their Impact on Morbidity and Stone Clearance.Research and reports in urology · 2023Review
- In Vivo Feasibility Test of a New Flexible Ureteroscopic Robotic System, easyUretero, for Renal Stone Retrieval in a Porcine Model.Yonsei medical journal · 2022Article
- Robotic flexible ureteroscopy: A new challenge in endourology.Investigative and clinical urology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Flexible ureteroscopy is the keystone of modern kidney stone treatment. Although a simple surgical technique achieves good clinical results and a low complication rate, there are high demands on the surgeon's dexterity and ergonomic restrictions. Robotic-assisted flexible ureteroscopy (rfURS) could overcome these limitations. After 4 years of use of rfURS at a tertiary stone center, performance factors were analyzed to define the role of rfURS in kidney stone management. A rfURS system was installed in August 2014 at the SLK Kliniken (Heilbronn, Germany). Treatment data of N = 240 consecutive patients undergoing rfURS were prospectively collected and analyzed. The patient cohort represents typical stone formers. N = 240 renal units containing 443 stones with an average stone load of 1798 mm
Indexed as
Identifiers
32557097What 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.