ArticleMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2023
Comparison between Retrograde Flexible Ureteroscopy and Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy for the Treatment of Renal Stones of 2-4 cm.
Article in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of stone-free rates and complication profiles.International urology and nephrology · 2026Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: a systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials.Urolithiasis · 2023Pooled it
- RIRS with flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath for large renal stones: a prospective randomized controlled study.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Trial
- A feasibility study of a novel irrigation technique for reducing intrapelvic pressure during ureterorenoscopy using conventional devices.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Retrograde intra renal surgery (RIRS) versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL) as a primary treatment for large renal stones: A prospective randomized controlled trial.Arab journal of urology · 2026Article
- Disruptions in Renal Stone Management during the COVID-19 Pandemic: a Retrospective Single-Center Study.Maedica · 2025Article
- Risk factors for urosepsis following ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
- Effect of core preventative screening on kidney stone surgical patterns.International urology and nephrology · 2024Article
- Impact of frailty on perioperative outcomes following percutaneous nephrolithotomy in older persons: evidence from the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample.Urolithiasis · 2024Article
- Comparative Analysis of Surgical Outcomes of Flexible Ureteroscopy and Da Vinci Robotic Surgery in Community Patients with Renal Pelvic Stones Larger than 2 cm.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and objectives: Renal stones are widespread, with a lifetime prevalence of 10% in adults. Flexible ureteroscopy enables urologists to treat lower calyx stones or even complex renal stones through the natural orifice and achieve an acceptable stone-free rate. Hence, we analyzed the effectiveness and safety of FURS versus PCNL in treating renal stones between 20 and 40 mm in diameter. Materials and methods: We retrospectively analyzed 250 consecutive patients with large renal solitary stones (stone burden between 2 and 4 cm) from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2020. The patients were divided into two groups: group 1 (125 patients), in which the patients were treated by a retrograde flexible ureteroscopic approach, and group 2 (125 patients), in which we used percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Stone characteristics and anatomical data were observed based on the computed tomography (CT) and/or KUB (Kidney-ureter-Bladder) radiography imaging archive. Results: The mean stone burden was 26.38 ± 4.453 mm in group 1 and 29.44 ± 4.817 mm in group 2. The stone-free rate after the first ureteroscopy was higher for the PNL(percutaneous nephrolithotomy) group (90.4%) than the F-URS group (68%). After two sessions of ureteroscopy, the SFR was 88.8% in the first group, and after three procedures, the SFR rose to 95.2%. The overall complication rate was higher in group 1 than in group 2 (18.4% vs. 16.8%), but without statistical relevance (p > 0.5). Furthermore, we encountered more grade III and IV complications in the PNL group (8.8% vs. 4.8%, p < 0.05). Conclusion: Flexible ureteroscopy proves to be efficient in treating renal stones over 2 cm. However, the patients must be informed that more than one procedure might be necessary to overcome the entire stone burden.
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.