ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022
Comparison of Ultra-Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy and Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Renal Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis from the KSER Update Series.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intrarenal pressure and clinical outcomes during suction-assisted versus conventional percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Hybrid endoscopic-robotic approaches for complex upper urinary tract disorders: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Article
- Comparative study between ultra-mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus stented extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy for treatment of renal stones in Egypt.Arab journal of urology · 2023Article
- Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment for renal calculi larger than 2 cm: a matched-pair analysis.Urolithiasis · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones have been developed to overcome the invasive disadvantages of PCNL. We aimed to compare the therapeutic effect and safety of ultra-mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy (UMPCNL) and RIRS for renal stones using an updated systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched clinical trials comparing UMPCNL and RIRS for renal stones using the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases up to October 2021. Seven studies were included in the current study. The renal stone size was 10-20 mm in three studies, 10-25 mm in one study, 10-35 mm in two studies, and not specified in one study. The stone-free rate of UMPCNL was higher than that of RIRS (
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.