Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35769622›Full record

ArticleKorean journal of transplantation2021

The impact of prophylactic ureteral stenting during kidney transplantation on postoperative surgical outcomes.

JongBeom Park, Soo Yeun Lee, Hyung Soon Lee, Sug Kyun Shin, Tae Hwan Kim

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Korean journal of transplantation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

JongBeom ParkDepartment of Surgery, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1362-4966
Soo Yeun LeeDepartment of Surgery, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0306-3336
Hyung Soon LeeDepartment of Surgery, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9825-8648
Sug Kyun ShinDepartment of Internal Medicine, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7866-0955
Tae Hwan KimDepartment of Radiology, National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1663-9138
National Health Insurance Service Ilsan Hospital · KR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of prophylactic ureteric stenting during kidney transplantation (KT). Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent KT between June 2016 and June 2019. The prophylactic ureteral stenting group (double-J [DJ]) and no-stent group (no-DJ) were compared with respect to the clinical data and surgical outcomes. Results: A total of 42 patients underwent KT; 17 patients were classified into the DJ group and 25 patients into the no-DJ group. Antithymocyte globulin induction and donor-specific antibody positivity were significantly higher in the DJ group. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of symptomatic urinary tract infection (UTI). The time to postoperative UTI was significantly shorter in the DJ group than in the no-DJ group (33.5±7.8 vs. 105.3±71.6 days, P=0.013). The development of postoperative BK viremia was significantly higher in the no-DJ group (0.0% vs. 16.0%, P=0.035). Urologic complications were significantly higher in the no-DJ group (0.0% vs. 16.0%, P=0.035). In the no-DJ group, urologic complications occurred in four patients ureteroneocystostomy stenosis in three patients and ureteroneocystostomy leakage in one patient. Percutaneous ureteral interventions were performed for all patients using percutaneous nephrostomy and reno-uretero-vesical stenting. However, there were no postoperative urologic complications in the DJ group. Conclusions: Prophylactic ureteric stenting during KT may be safe and feasible without significantly increasing the incidence of UTI and BK viremia. Additionally, prophylactic ureteric stenting may reduce urologic complications after KT.

Indexed as

Kidney transplantationPostoperative complicationStentsUreterUrinary tract infection

Identifiers

PMID35769622
PMCPMC9235335
OpenAlexW3137773604

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.