Trial reportWorld journal of urology2021
Which frequency is better for pediatric shock wave lithotripsy? Intermediate or low: a prospective randomized study.
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 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Complication rate after pediatric shock wave lithotripsy according to Clavien-Dindo grading system: results from a systematic review and meta-analysis of the existing literature.World journal of urology · 2023Pooled it
- Which frequency is better for pediatric shock wave lithotripsy? Low intermediate or high: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Review
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeShock wave lithotripsy (SWL) is the first option in the treatment of pediatric kidney stones; however, optimal frequency is still uncertain. The aim of this study was to compare low frequency [60 shocks per minute (SWs/min)] and intermediate frequency [90 SWs/min] in terms of lithotripsy success, complications, cardiac arrhythmia, anesthesia time, secondary procedures, and efficiency quotient (EQ) in children.
methodsSeventy-eight consecutive children who received SWL for radiopaque renal stones between July 2016 and January 2020 were randomly divided into two groups: Group 60 (SWL frequency: 60 SWs/min) and Group 90 (SWL frequency: 90 SWs/min). After exclusion (remaining 71 children), Group 60 (n = 38) and Group 90 (n = 33) were compared using univariate analysis.
resultsThe median age of children (37 girls, 34 boys) was 5 (1-16) years. Patient demographics and stone features were similar between the groups. Success rate after the last SWL session was 81.6% (n = 31) for Group 60 and 87.9% (n = 29) for Group 90 (p = 0.527). Stone-free rate after the first, second, and third sessions was 42.1%, 18.4%, and 21.1% for Group 60 and 48.5%, 27.3%, and 12.1% for Group 90, respectively. Additional treatment rate was similar between the groups. In Group 60, the EQ was 57.83, and it was 64.07 in Group 90. Median total anesthesia time was significantly longer in Group 60 (74.5 min) than in Group 90 (32 min; p < 0.001).
conclusionIntermediate frequency and low-frequency pediatric SWL have similar success rates; however, intermediate-frequency SWL has a shorter anesthesia time.
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.