Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36729301›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2023

Comparison of shock wave lithotripsy and ureteroscopy in patients with proximal ureteral stones under the COVID-19 pandemic.

Peng Wang, Yunhong Zhan, Jia Li, Gang Liu, Zhenhua Li, Song Bai

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

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 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Peng WangDepartment of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1369-4879
Yunhong ZhanDepartment of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4693-3434
Jia LiDepartment of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5965-3829
Gang LiuDepartment of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9158-7502
Zhenhua LiDepartment of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China. lizhenhuacmu@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5163-2508
Song BaiDepartment of Urology, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, 36 Sanhao Street, Shenyang, 110004, Liaoning, People's Republic of China. baisongcmu81@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6073-145X

Funding

Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Education Department QN2019013Natural Science Foundation of Liaoning Science and Technology Department 2020-BS-093
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare the effectiveness, safety, and cost between ultrasound-guided shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) with an early second session protocol and ureteroscopy (URS) in patients with proximal ureteral stones using the propensity score matching (PSM) method based on a large prospective study.

methodsThis prospective study was conducted in a tertiary hospital from June 2020 to April 2022. Patients who underwent lithotripsy (SWL or URS) for proximal ureteral stones were enrolled. The stone-free rate (SFR), complications, and cost were recorded. PSM analysis was performed.

resultsA total of 1230 patients were included, of whom 81.1% (998) were treated with SWL and 18.9% (232) were treated with URS. After PSM, the SWL group had an equivalent SFR at one month (88.7 vs. 83.6%, P = 0.114) compared with the URS group. Complications were rare and comparable between the two groups, while the incidence of ureteral injuries was higher in the URS group compared with the SWL group (1.4 vs. 0%, P = 0.011). The hospital stay was significantly shorter (1 day vs. 2 days, P < 0.001), and the cost was considerably less (2000 vs. 25,053, P < 0.001) in the SWL group compared with the URS group.

conclusionThis prospective PSM cohort demonstrated that ultrasound-guided SWL with an early second session protocol had equivalent effectiveness but better safety and lower cost compared with URS in the treatment of patients with proximal ureteral stones, whether the stones were radiopaque or radiolucent. These results will facilitate treatment decisions for proximal ureteral stones.

Indexed as

COVID-19LithotripsyUreteral CalculiHumansPandemicsProspective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUreteroscopyCOVID-19 pandemicEarly second session protocolProximal ureteral stonesShockwave lithotripsyUreteroscopy

Identifiers

PMID36729301
PMCPMC9892663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.