ArticleWorld journal of urology2023
A single center comparative study of two single use digital flexible ureteroscopy in the management of renal stones less than 2 cm.
Article in World journal of urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Complications of Single-Use Flexible Ureteroscopy vs. Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopy: A Narrative Review.Cureus · 2024Review
- Effect of flexible cystoscopy combined with flexible ureteroscopy on short-term outcomes in patients with complex renal stones.American journal of translational research · 2024Article
- Evaluating the Safety of Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS): Intra- and Early Postoperative Complications in Patients Enrolled in the Global Multicentre Flexible Ureteroscopy Outcome Registry (FLEXOR).International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeFor renal stones < 2 cm, guidelines recommend the use of retrograde intrarenal surgery as a first line treatment option. Many available single use flexible ureteroscopy were found. We aim to compare the effectiveness of two single use flexible ureteroscopy; Pusen Uscope 3011 versus LithoVue in the management of renal stones less than 2 cm.
methodsOur study prospectively included 60 patients equally divided in to two groups: Pusen group and LithoVue group during the period from June 2020 to June 2021. The included patients were above 18 years old. Perioperative details as operative time, fluoroscopy time, hospital stay, and complications were recorded. Stone free rate was assessed. Base purchase cost was also compared.
resultsThere was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding age, gender, and body mass index (BMI), stones size, side, number and location. The perioperative evaluation and outcome had no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding the operative time, hospital stay, access sheath use, and stone free rate or radiation exposure. Among all cases, we had 49 cases (81.6%) with no postoperative complications (21 cases for Pusen group and 28 cases for LithoVue group). The incidence of postoperative complications was significantly higher among Pusen group than LithoVue group (p = 0.02). Initial purchase cost for both FURS had no significant difference (P = 0.86).
conclusionRIRS can be performed effectively with Pusen 3011 and LithoVue single use flexible ureteroscopy in patients diagnosed with renal calculi < 2 cm with superior outcomes with LithoVue.
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.