Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34365712›Full record

ReviewBJU international2022

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy - the puncture.

Peter Alken

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in BJU international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Acoustic reflector-enabled forward-viewing ultrasound image-guided access.Journal of medical imaging (Bellingham, Wash.) · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Peter AlkenDepartment of Urology, Klinik für Urologie und Urochirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-4819-6757

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine what importance is given to the puncture and assistive technologies in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) in the current urological literature.

methodsPubMed was searched for English publications and reviews for the keywords: 'percutaneous nephrolithotomy', 'percutaneous nephrostomy', 'puncture'. The search was limited to the last 5 years, January 2016 until February 2021. Based on 183 abstracts, 121 publications were selected, read, and reviewed. References, older or seminal papers were read and cited if they contributed to a better understanding. A total of 198 references form the basis of this narrative review.

resultsThe puncture is frequently referred to as the most crucial part of PNL. In contrast, the influence of the puncture on the failure rate of PNL and the specific puncture-related complications seems to be low in the single-digit percentage range. However, there are no universally accepted definitions and standards measuring the quality of puncture. Consequently, the impact of the puncture on general PNL complications, on stone scores predicting success rates and on learning curves evaluating surgeons' performance have not been systematically studied. Assistive technologies rely on fluoroscopy and ultrasonography, the latter of which is becoming the preferred imaging modality for monitoring the entire procedure. Needle bending, a problem relevant to all puncture techniques, is not addressed in the urological literature.

conclusionsThe importance attached to puncture in PNL in the current urological literature is subjectively high but objectively low. Some basics of puncture are not well understood in urology. Disciplines other than urology are more actively involved in the development of puncture techniques.

Indexed as

Nephrolithotomy, PercutaneousFluoroscopyHumansKidney CalculiLearning CurveNeedlesPuncturesSurgery, Computer-AssistedTreatment FailureUltrasonographyEndourology#EndoUrologyfluoroscopykidney stones#KidneyStonesneedle bendingnephrostomypercutaneous nephrolithotomypuncturerenal accessultrasonographyurolithiasis#UroStone

Identifiers

PMID34365712

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.