Observational studyWorld journal of urology2021
Evaluation of a free 3D software for kidney stones' surgical planning: "kidney stone calculator" a pilot study.
Observational study 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 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of retrograde ıntrarenal surgery performed with thulium fiber laser lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of 20-30 mm kidney stones in adults: a randomized prospective study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Trial
- Flexible ureterorenoscopy and lithotripsy with pulsed thulium: YAG laser: a multicenter retrospective study.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- From conventional imaging software to artificial intelligence: tools for stone volume assessment in urolithiasis. Α review by the EAU and YAU sections of endourology.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- When stones grow: a practical guide from EAU endourology to changes in volume with increasing size.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Quantitative analysis of pleural effusion after prone percutaneous nephrolithotomy based on routine postoperative abdominal computed tomography: prevalence, risk factors, and clinical implications.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2026Article
- Innersight, a novel software for the formation of preoperative CT-based 3D models for the treatment of lithiasis: does it really help? A pilot study.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- In vitro comparative analysis of ablation volume and energy requirements for 1 mm³ stone ablation using ho: YAG, p-Tm: YAG, and TFL lasers.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Stone volume instead of maximum stone diameter: results from an international survey.BJU international · 2025Article
- From laser-on time to lithotripsy duration: improving the prediction of lithotripsy duration with 'Kidney Stone Calculator' using artificial intelligence.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Innovative use of the new pulsed-thulium: YAG laser for ureteroscopic lithotripsy: can the "kidney stone calculator" predict lithotripsy duration?Urolithiasis · 2024Article
- Thulium fiber laser versus pulsed Thulium:YAG for laser lithotripsy during flexible ureteroscopy.Lasers in medical science · 2024Article
- Is "Kidney Stone Calculator" efficient in predicting ureteroscopic lithotripsy duration? A holmium:YAG and thulium fiber lasers comparative analysis.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- From laser-on time to lithotripsy duration: how neural networks can refine "KIDNEY STONE CALCULATOR" predictions for ureteroscopic lithotripsy duration: preliminary results.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Planning my ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy: how much energy and time should I reasonably expect? Integrating the concept of laser energy consumption (J/mmWorld journal of urology · 2024Article
- Clinical Reproducibility of the Stone Volume Measurement: A "Kidney Stone Calculator" Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Initial clinical experience with the pulsed solid-state thulium YAG laser from Dornier during RIRS: first 25 cases.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- The efficacy of retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS) for lower pole stones: results from 2946 patients.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Single-Session Impact of High-Power Laser with Moses Technology for Lower Pole Stones in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Retrospective Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Laser Fiber Displacement Velocity during Tm-Fiber and Ho:YAG Laser Lithotripsy: Introducing the Concept of Optimal Displacement Velocity.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionKidney Stone Calculator (KSC) is a free, three-dimensional (3D) planning software for flexible ureteroscopy(fURS) with Holmium:YAG(Ho:YAG) endocorporeal lithotripsy (EL). KSC provides the stone volume (SV) and expected duration of lithotripsy (ExDL) estimations based on non-enhanced-CT scan (NECT) DICOM series. We aimed to provide a preclinical and clinical evaluation of KSC. PATIENTS AND
methodsA preclinical evaluation measured the SV by three operators (resident, endourology expert and research engineer) among 17 NECT cases. Between January and March 2020, a multicentric, prospective, observational double-blind clinical evaluation was conducted in patients presenting with renal stones treated with Ho:YAG-EL during fURS and preoperative NECT. Demographic and surgical data were collected. The primary endpoint was a significant median difference between ExDL and EffectiveDL (EfDL). Second, efficiency (J/mm
resultsThe preclinical evaluation showed no significant difference in the SV measurements among operators (p > 0.05). Pearson and Kendall coefficients of 0.99 and 0.98, respectively, were found. Twenty-six patients were included in the clinical evaluation, with a median age of 55 years. In 66% of cases, there was a single stone located in the lower pole, with a density > 1000 Hounsfield Unit observed in 42% and 85% of cases. A 14% [Q1-Q3 (5.4-24.8); p = 0.36] median difference between ExDL and EfDL was noted, which was greater in the case of lower pole stones with no possible relocation (p = 0.008). Median values of 17.6 J/mm
conclusionsKidney Stone Calculator is a reproducible and accurate software that allows for an estimation of the stone burden and provides an ExDL for URSf. Defining the influencing factors of EL will improve its ExDL.
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.