ArticleResearch and reports in urology2020
The Application of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery to Remove a Single Large Kidney Stone During Pregnancy.
Article in Research and reports in urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Being all-seeing gymnast within kidney cavity: analysis of the optical and flexibility characteristics trends of 61 flexible ureteroscopes over four decades.Urolithiasis · 2024Review
- Miniaturization of flexible ureteroscopes: a comparative trend analysis of 59 flexible ureteroscopes.Urolithiasis · 2023Review
- Massive Ureterolithiasis.Cureus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo report the application and outcome of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) to remove a large kidney stone during pregnancy. PATIENT AND
methodsA 30-year-old woman presented with an infected kidney stone (3 cm in size) at 4 weeks of pregnancy. We decided to remove the stone due to the possibility of obstruction and infection and chose to carry out this procedure by RIRS. In order to avoid complications associated with anesthetic, the surgery was carried out after the infection had cleared and when the patient had entered the second trimester of pregnancy. First, we used an ureteral access sheath and semi-rigid ureteroscopy to evaluate the ureteral lumen. We confirmed that the ureteral access sheath had been positioned appropriately by direct visualization with a flexible ureterorenoscope. The procedure was then carried out with a radiation-free protocol and without fluoroscopy. Ho-YAG laser lithotripsy was used to fragment the stones, and these fragments were then removed in a stone basket. The patient required three sessions of RIRS to remove the stone in its entirety; during this time, the patient was 18-29 weeks into her pregnancy. During each session, we removed approximately 30% of the stone. The patient developed fever after the first operation but responded fully to antibiotics. There were no perioperative complications, and the patient only remained in hospital for 3 days. The male infant was delivered by caesarian section at 37 weeks of pregnancy without any health complications. RESULTS AND
conclusionWe successfully removed a large kidney stone from a pregnant patient using an ureteral access sheath and RIRS without fluoroscopy. There were no complications indicating that this procedure can be carried out safely during pregnancy.
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.