Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34337498›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2021

Effectiveness of Flexible Ureterorenoscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Renal Calculi of 5-15 mm: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Christian Daniel Fankhauser, Damian Weber, Michael Müntener, Cedric Poyet, Tullio Sulser, Thomas Hermanns

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07193940 (Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Treatment of Lower Calyceal Renal Stones Less Than 15 mm), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07193940 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Flexible Ureteroscopy Versus Extracorporeal Shock Wave Lithotripsy for Treatment of Lower Calyceal Renal Stones Less Than 15 mm: A Prospective Randomized Comparative Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2025 to 2028Enrolled70ConditionsKidney StonesArmsFlexible Ureteroscopy, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors.

Christian Daniel FankhauserDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Damian WeberDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Michael MüntenerDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Cedric PoyetDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Tullio SulserDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thomas HermannsDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrimary flexible ureterorenoscopy (URS) and extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) are treatment options in patients with renal calculi of 5-15 mm.

objectiveTo compare effectiveness, complication rates, and pain scores between primary URS and SWL. DESIGN SETTING AND

participantsBetween 2011 and 2016, patients with renal calculi between 5 and 15 mm were randomized to undergo either primary URS or SWL. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Stone-free rate and size of residual fragments assessed by computed tomography after 3 mo, complications, and pain scores were evaluated. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The study was prematurely closed after randomizing 44 patients due to poor accrual. The 3-mo stone-free rate and mean residual stone size were, respectively, 61% and 1.8 mm after URS and 48% and 2.4 mm after SWL. Early post-treatment pain scores were significantly higher after URS than after SWL on day 1 (3.3 vs 1.6,

conclusionsURS appears to be associated with higher early post-treatment discomfort, which could be associated with routine postoperative stenting. Owing to premature closure of this trial, the power was insufficient to formally compare URS and SWL; however, the present data might be informative to counsel patients about treatment outcomes and allow future meta-analyses. PATIENT SUMMARY: This study was ended prematurely, but it contributes data about efficacy and side effects of different treatment options in patients with renal calculi.

Indexed as

Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsyRenal stonesUreterorenoscopyUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID34337498
PMCPMC8317856

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.