Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34168529›Full record

ArticleCurrent urology2021

Spinal versus general anesthesia during retrograde intra-renal surgery: A propensity score matching analysis.

Alberto Olivero, Lorenzo Ball, Carlotta Fontaneto, Guglielmo Mantica, Paolo Bottino, Paolo Pelosi, Carlo Terrone

Open access · diamondAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Current urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Alberto OliveroDepartment of Surgical and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Lorenzo BallDepartment of Surgical and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Carlotta FontanetoAnesthesia and Intensive Care, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino IRCCS for Oncology and Neurosciences, Genova, Italy.
Guglielmo ManticaDepartment of Surgical and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Paolo BottinoDivision of Urology, Ospedale Policlinico San Martino IRCCS for Oncology and Neurosciences, Genova, Italy.
Paolo PelosiDepartment of Surgical and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Carlo TerroneDepartment of Surgical and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.
Ospedale Policlinico San Martino · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe indications for retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS) have greatly increased, however, there is still no consensus on the use of spinal anesthesia (SA) during this procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparability of surgical conditions and outcomes with RIRS performed under SA versus general anesthesia (GA) for renal stones. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis was a prospective, observational study in patients scheduled for RIRS in a single teaching hospital in Italy. Inclusion criteria were age >18 years and the presence of single or multiple renal stones. We recorded information concerning the site of lithiasis, the number of calculi, total stone burden, and the presence of concomitant ureteral stones or hydronephrosis. A propensity score-matched analysis was performed to evaluate the results in terms of surgical outcome, intraoperative and postoperative complications, and analgesia demand balanced for confounding factors. Patients were followed-up until day 90 from discharge.

resultsWe included 120 patients, the propensity score-matched cohort included 40 patients in the SA and 40 in the GA groups. The stone-free rate was 67.5% in the GA group and 70.0% in the SA group (

conclusionsIn our cohort, RIRS performed under SA and GA was equivalent in terms of surgical results and complications.

Indexed as

AnesthesiaMinimally invasive therapyRetrograde intra-renal surgeryUreteroscopyUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID34168529
PMCPMC8221011
OpenAlexW3157236457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.