ArticleUrolithiasis2022
The effect of COVID-19 outbreak on urological procedures for urinary stones: data from three high-volumes centers in China.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Personnel Scarcity on Urolithiasis Treatment: A Comparative Study of the Pre- and Post-Pandemic Eras.Urologia internationalis · 2025Article
- COVID-19 outbreak impact on urolithiasis treatments: A multicenter retrospective study across 9 urological centers in Italy.Current urology · 2024Article
- Double J Stents and Reno-Ureteral Lithiasis: Dynamic Changes in Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
China has been the first country to be affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. The pandemic resulted in significant disruption of Health Care Services worldwide, and this effect on treatments for urinary stones is currently unclear. This is the first retrospective study involving three tertiary referral centers for urolithiasis across China. We evaluated surgical volumes and peri-operative outcomes of procedures delivered for upper urinary tract stones. We compared trimester prior to restrictions for COVID-19 (October 1st, 2019 to December 31st, 2019, period A), during restrictions (February 1st, 2020 to March 31st, 2020, period B), and afterword (April 1st, 2020 to June 31st, 2020, period C). A total of 2,543 procedures have been carried out. We observed a loss of 743 cases during period B (-29.2%) and 201 during period C (-7.9%). Percutaneous surgery showed the worst reduction, with 507 mini-PCNLs delivered in period A, 168 in period B (-60.8%), and 389 (-18.3%) in period C (p = 0.001). A worst trend was shown for standard PCNLs with 84 procedures carried out in period A, 5 in period B (-95.2%), and 9 (-89.2%) in period C (p = 0.001). Retrograde surgery also decreased, from 420 cases in period A to 190 cases in period B (-54.8%). An increment was however seen in period C when 468 cases have been carried out (+ 11.4%, p = 0.008). In term of SFRs, a difference was noticed for RIRSs, being 69.2%, 80.5%, and 69.3% during three periods (p = 0.045) and semirigid ureteroscopies (90.3%, 97.1%, and 84.8%, p = 0.013). Charlson's Comorbidity Score could not show any difference between groups as well as no differences in term of post-operative complications have been noticed.
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.