Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33688992›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of urology2021

Silicone-hydrocoated ureteral stents encrustation and biofilm formation after 3-week dwell time: results of a prospective randomized multicenter clinical study.

Yazeed Barghouthy, Oliver Wiseman, Eugenio Ventimiglia, Julien Letendre, Jonathan Cloutier, Michel Daudon, Francois Kleinclauss, Steeve Doizi, Mariela Corrales, Olivier Traxer

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Case - An invisible stent.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Silicone vs. Polyurethane Stent: The Final Countdown.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022
    Review
  12. Developments in Ureteral Stent Technology.Frontiers in surgery · 2021
    Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Yazeed BarghouthyGRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique Sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Oliver WisemanUrology Department, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Eugenio VentimigliaGRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique Sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Julien LetendreUrology, Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, 5345 Blvd de L'Assomption, Bureau 220, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jonathan CloutierUrology, University Hospital Centre of Quebec City, 10 rue de l'Espinay, Quebec, QC, Canada.
Michel DaudonAP-HP, Hôpital Tenon, 75020, Paris, France.
Francois KleinclaussDepartment of Urology and Renal Transplantation, CHRU Besancon, 25000, Besancon, France.
Steeve DoiziGRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique Sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Mariela CorralesGRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique Sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France.
Olivier TraxerGRC n°20, Groupe de Recherche Clinique Sur la Lithiase Urinaire, Hôpital Tenon, Sorbonne Université, 75020, Paris, France. olivier.traxer@aphp.fr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2459-3803
Sorbonne Université · FRCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust · GBCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besançon · FRCentre hospitalier universitaire de Québec · CAHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo explore the risk of encrustation and biofilm formation for silicone ureteral stents compared to percuflex polymer stents, through a randomized multicenter study. PATIENTS AND

methodsDesign, setting and participants: A Multicenter, prospective, randomized, single blind, comparative study of hydrocoated silicone stent (Coloplast Imajin

results119 stents were available after removal for analysis, 56 in the silicone and 63 in the Percuflex TM Plus group. Mean dwelling duration was 21.8 days for silicone, 22.1 days for PercuflexTM Plus. There was significantly more biofilm on Percuflex™ Plus compared to silicone (1.24 ± 0.08 vs 0.93 ± 0.09, p = 0.0021), and more mineral encrustation (1.22 ± 0.10 vs 0.78 ± 0.11, p = 0.0048), respectively.

conclusionsThis multicenter randomized study shows that silicone-hydrocoated stents are less prone to encrustation than PercuflexTM Plus after a 3-week dwelling period and confirms the low encrustation potential of silicone.

Indexed as

BiofilmsCoated Materials, BiocompatiblePolymersSiliconesAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesProsthesis DesignSingle-Blind MethodStentsTime FactorsUreterCoated Materials, Biocompatiblepercuflex TMPolymersSiliconesBiofilmFlexible ureteroscopyNephrolithiasisSiliconeStent encrustationUreteral stent

Identifiers

PMID33688992
OpenAlexW3133689658

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.