ArticleWorld journal of urology2022
Comparison of vacuum suction ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy and traditional ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy for impacted upper ureteral stones.
Article in World journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of suction technique and non-suction technique in retrograde intrarenal stone surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International urology and nephrology · 2025Pooled it
- F-URS with FANS versus mPCNL for 2-3 cm UUTS: a RCT with a subgroup analysis of 2-2.5 cm stones.BJU international · 2026Trial
- Trial
- The assistive role of an internal fluid circulatory device in ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a randomized, controlled and prospective study.International urology and nephrology · 2025Trial
- RIRS with FV-UAS vs. MPCNL for 2-3-cm upper urinary tract stones: a prospective study.Urolithiasis · 2024Trial
- Flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheath combined with flexible ureteroscopy for proximal impacted ureter stones: a retrospective case series.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Enhanced Pressure Management Using an Upgraded Vacuum-Assisted Ureteroscopic System: Experimental Validation and Predictive Modeling.Urologia internationalis · 2026Article
- Tip-flexible suctioning ureteral access sheath combined with flexible ureteroscope: a single-institution experience including in vitro experiments.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Machine learning models to predict the zero-fragment rate and lower pole access with FANS during flexible Ureteroscopy-an EAU section of endourology study.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Comparison of flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath versus conventional sheath combined with single-use flexible ureteroscope in the treatment of renal calculi.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Article
- Suction use in ureterorenoscopy: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.BJUI compass · 2024Review
- Retrospective study of ureteral stenosis after holmium laser lithotripsy.The Journal of international medical research · 2024Article
- Comparative efficacy between retrograde intrarenal surgery with vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath and minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 1-2 cm infectious upper ureteral stones: a prospective, randomized controlled study.Frontiers in surgery · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo compare a novel vacuum suction ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (VS-URS) with traditional ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy (T-URS) for impacted upper ureteral stones and to better define the potential benefits of VS-URS.
methodsBetween May 2019 and March 2021, 158 patients with impacted upper ureteral stones underwent ureteroscopic holmium-YAG laser lithotripsy. Of these, 76 underwent VS-URS and 82 underwent T-URS. In VS-URS procedures, the vacuum suction device is composed of a 5F ureteral catheter and a tee joint. The ureteral catheter is linked to the vacuum aspirator by the sidearm of the tee joint, and a 200 μm fiber is inserted through the tee joint and the ureteral catheter into the stone site for lithotripsy.
resultsWhen compared to the T-URS group, the VS-URS group had a shorter mean operation time (38.18 ± 6.37 min vs. 46.65 ± 5.66 min; P = 0.000), lower fever rate (3.9% vs. 14.6%; P < 0.022), less stone retropulsion (5.3% vs. 18.3%; P = 0.012), lower extra management rate (6.58% vs. 21.95%; P = 0.006), and a higher stone-free rate of the first postoperative day (88.2% vs. 72.0%; P = 0.011). There were no significant differences in stone-free rates 1 month after surgery between groups (94.7% vs. 92.7%; P = 0.748).
conclusionsVS-URS is an effective modality for impacted upper ureteral stones, and has a shorter operating time, lower fever rate, less stone retropulsion, and a higher primary stone-free rate compared with T-URS.
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.