ArticleWorld journal of urology2022
Long-term evaluation of outcomes and costs of urolithiasis re-interventions after ureteroscopy, extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy based on German health insurance claims data.
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 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of outcomes in kidney stone management: stone-free rate vs. cost vs. quality of life: a systematic review from EAU endourology.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- The assistive role of an internal fluid circulatory device in ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a randomized, controlled and prospective study.International urology and nephrology · 2025Trial
- Recovery After Ureterorenoscopy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Questionnaire Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Visibly Transparent, Near-Infrared Absorbing Nanofluids Enable High-Efficiency and Safe Laser Lithotripsy.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Metabolomic and network Pharmacology insights into the anti-inflammatory and anti-urolithiatic potential of Ficus religiosa seeds.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Economic evaluation of surgical treatments for urolithiasis in a public hospital.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Does a kidney stone culture make sense? The findings of microbiological cultures of kidney stones and correlation with stone composition, preoperative urine testing and postoperative SIRS.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- In-vitro and in-vivo evaluation for anti-urolithiasis potential of Ficus racemosa L. bark extract in ethylene glycol induced rat model.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Treatment patterns for urolithiasis and renal colic-like pain symptoms in Poland: The POLSTONE Study.Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
- Vitamin D and Calcium Supplementation and Urolithiasis: A Controversial and Multifaceted Relationship.Nutrients · 2023Review
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 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeComparisons of ureteroscopy (URS), extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) for urolithiasis considering long-term follow-up are rare. We aimed to analyze re-intervention rates, costs and sick leave days of URS, SWL and PCNL patients within 7 years.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study was based on German health insurance claims data. We included 54,609 urolithiasis patients incidentally treated in 2008-2010. We investigated time to re-intervention, number of sick leave days and healthcare costs. We applied negative binomial, extended Cox regression and gamma models.
results54% were incidentally treated with URS, 40% with SWL and 6% with PCNL. 15% of URS, 26% of SWL and 23% of PCNL patients were re-treated within 7 years. Time to re-intervention was significantly lower for PCNL (955 days) and SWL (937 days) than URS (1078 days) patients. Costs for incident treatment were significantly higher for PCNL (2760€) and lower for SWL (1342€) than URS (1334€) patients. Yet, total costs including re-interventions were significantly higher for PCNL (5783€) and SWL (3240€) than URS (2979€) patients. Total number of sick leave days was increased for PCNL (13.0 days) and SWL (10.1 days) compared to URS (6.8 days) patients.
conclusionThis study describes outcomes after use of different intervention options for urolithiasis. URS patients showed longest time free of re-interventions and lowest number of sick leave days. Although SWL patients initially had lower costs, URS patients had lower costs in the long run. PCNL patients showed high costs and sick leave days.
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.