Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35937652›Full record

ArticleCentral European journal of urology2022

Current management of renal colic across Europe and its compliance to the European Association of Urology Guidelines on Urolithiasis: a survey from the European Section of Uro-technology, European Section of Urolithiasis, Young Academic Urologists study groups.

Selçuk Güven, Mehmet Giray Sönmez, Bhaskar Kumar Somani, Ali Serdar Gözen, Kemal Sarica, Juan Gómez Rivas, Udo Nagele, Theodoros Tokas

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Central European journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Selçuk GüvenUrology Department, Meram School of Medicine, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey.
Mehmet Giray SönmezUrology Department, Meram School of Medicine, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey.
Bhaskar Kumar SomaniUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Trust, Department of Urology, Southampton, United Kingdom.
Ali Serdar GözenSLK Kliniken Urology Department, Teaching Hospital of Heidelberg University, Heilbronn, Germany.
Kemal SaricaDepartment of Urology, Biruni University, Medical School, Istanbul, Turkey.
Juan Gómez RivasDepartment of Urology, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Udo NageleDepartment of Urology and Andrology, General Hospital Hall i.T., Hall in Tirol, Austria.
Theodoros TokasDepartment of Urology and Andrology, General Hospital Hall i.T., Hall in Tirol, Austria.
Necmettin Erbakan University · TRTirol Kliniken · ATBiruni University · TRHospital Clínico San Carlos · ESSLK-Kliniken Heilbronn · DEUniversity Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Renal colic due to ureteral stones represents the primary acute condition in urology. Although guideline recommendations are available the institution, urologist, and patient preferences in diagnosis and treatment may differ. We aimed to evaluate the adherence of different European countries to the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines of urolithiasis and demonstrate trends in diagnostic and treatment approaches. Material and methods: We used a survey including 33 questions clustered in four sections. The survey was circulated to the representatives of the main urological centers in Europe using the European Section of Uro-technology (ESUT), the European Section of Urolithiasis (EULIS), the Young Academic Urologists (YAU), and the European Urology Residents Education Programme (EUREP) mailing lists. The first section included participant and institution demographics, the second assessed the common diagnostic and treatment pathways, the third discussed the advantages and disadvantages of treatment strategies and the fourth investigated treatment preferences in different clinical scenarios. A descriptive analysis was performed. Results: Of all participants, 84.21% stated that their departments follow specific guidelines, with no significant differences between institutions (p = 0.18). Preferred treatment practice difference in the case scenarios was significantly influenced by the Department bed capacities (p = 0.01), and complications varied between institutions (p = 0.02). Interestingly, 37-45% of participants were unaware of the different treatment costs. Conclusions: Although urologists generally decide according to local or international guidelines when approaching renal colic patients, there are deviations in clinical practice due to 'doctor preference' and 'bed availability'. Many urologists are unaware of treatment costs.

Indexed as

care surveyextracorporeal shock wave lithotripsyhealthrenal colicureteroscopyurolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID35937652
PMCPMC9326703
OpenAlexW4285079012

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.