ArticleUrolithiasis2023
Is conservative management safe in patients with acute ureterolithiasis and perirenal stranding?
Article in Urolithiasis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk factors and prediction model for stone mucosa adhesion before retrograde intrarenal surgery.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2025Article
- Spontaneous renal subcapsular fluid accumulation with hemorrhage due to ureteral stone: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
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
In patients presenting with ureterolithiasis, perirenal stranding is frequently observed in non-contrast computed tomography. Because perirenal stranding may be caused by tears in the collecting system, previous studies have described an increased risk of infectious complications and suggested broad empiric antibiotic therapy and immediate decompressing of the upper urinary tract. We hypothesized that these patients can also be managed conservatively. Therefore, we retrospectively identified patients with ureterolithiasis and perirenal stranding and compared diagnostic and treatment characteristics as well as treatment outcomes between patients undergoing conservative versus interventional management by ureteral stenting, percutaneous drainage or primary ureteroscopic stone removal. We classified perirenal stranding as mild, moderate or severe based on its radiological extent. Of 211 patients, 98 were managed conservatively. Patients in the interventional group had larger ureteral stones, more proximal ureteral stone location, more severe perirenal stranding, higher systemic and urinary infectious parameters, higher creatinine levels, and received more frequent antibiotic therapy. The conservatively managed group experienced a spontaneous stone passage rate of 77%, while 23% required delayed intervention. In the interventional and conservative groups, 4% and 2% of patients, respectively, developed sepsis. None of the patients in either group developed a perirenal abscess. Comparison of perirenal stranding grade between mild, moderate and severe in the conservatively treated group showed no difference in the spontaneous stone passage and infectious complications. In conclusion, conservative management without prophylactic antibiotics for ureterolithiasis and perirenal stranding is a valid treatment option as long as no clinical or laboratory signs of renal failure or infections are observed.
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.