ArticleCureus2022
Trends of Acute Renal Colic During COVID-19 Lockdown: An Experience From Saudi Arabia.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic represents an unprecedented challenge for healthcare systems around the world. Saudi Arabia was one of the first countries to experience a lockdown and postponement of elective surgical procedures. The objective of this study was to assess the trends of acute renal colic presenting to our emergency department. Methods This retrospective study targeted all patients who presented with acute renal colic during the lockdown period (March 23, 2019 to June 20, 2019). Patients' and stone data were collected. The patient's data included age, gender, BMI, and comorbidities. Stones' data included stone size, location, side, evidence of obstruction and UTI, and planned and conducted management. Results A total of 137 patients were identified; 92 (67.2%) patients were males with a mean age of 44 ± 16 years. Positive history of urolithiasis was reported in 47 (34.3%). The most common initial investigation was non-contrast CTs (93.4%). The majority of patients had a stone size of < 10 mm (93%) and ureteric stones (81.2%). A total of 32 patients (32.4%) had evidence of UTI and 63.4% had evidence of obstruction. Most of the patients (73.7%) were offered medical expulsive therapy (MET). Only 2.2% did not receive the planned management. Conclusion The observed pattern shows that the management during the lockdown did not differ from the original recommendations. This could be due to the fact that most patients had stone sizes between 5 and 10 mm and consequently were managed by METs. Larger data need to be conducted to provide concrete evidence. Such data are relevant to provide a clear guide for management and to establish protocols for emergency lockdown situations.
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.