SynthesisComputational and mathematical methods in medicine2022
Comparison of the Efficacy and Complications of Soft Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Urinary Calculi: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Computational and mathematical methods in medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Retracted: Comparison of the Efficacy and Complications of Soft Ureteroscopy Lithotripsy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Treatment of Urinary Calculi: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-06-28Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and complications of soft ureteroscopic lithotripsy (SUL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) in the treatment of urinary calculi and to provide evidence-proof medicine basis for the popularization and application of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, China knowledge Network Database (CNKI), China VIP Database, Wanfang Database, and China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) related to soft ureteroscopic lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of urinary calculi from Jan. 2010 to Mar. 2022. The bias risk of each included literature was assessed according to the standard of Cochrane manual 5.1.0. The collected data were meta-analyzed by RevMan 5.4 statistical software. Results: Ultimately, 6 RCT (a total of 794 samples) were included for meta-analysis. Heterogeneity test results of stone clearance rate were chi Conclusion: PCNL and SUL can achieve higher stone clearance rate in the treatment of renal calculi. However, SUL has the advantages of less intraoperative bleeding, short stress reaction and postoperative hospital stay, less damage to renal function, and low incidence of complications, which is beneficial to the rapid recovery of patients after operation. More studies with higher methodological quality and longer intervention time are needed to further verify.
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.