Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36974241›Full record

ArticleCureus2023

Outcomes in Lower Pole Kidney Stone Management Using Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Compared With Retrograde Intra Renal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Obaid Ur Rehman, Momal Imran, Mudessar Rafaqat, Fayyaz Ur Rahman Haider, Aveena Rehman, Umer Farooq, Shabbar H Changazi, Fazal Ur Rehman

Open access · diamondFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Safety and efficacy of ambulatory tubeless mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the management of 10-25 mm renal calculi A retrospective study.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Obaid Ur RehmanUrology, Ganga Ram Hospital, Lahore, PAK.
Momal ImranCommunity Medicine, Akhtar Saeed Medical and Dental College, Lahore, PAK.
Mudessar RafaqatDepartment of Urology, Services Hospital Lahore, Lahore, PAK.
Fayyaz Ur Rahman HaiderSurgery/General Medicine/Trauma & Orthopedics/Neurology, Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences, Islamabad, PAK.
Aveena RehmanDepartment of General Surgery, Services Hospital Lahore, Lahore, PAK.
Umer FarooqDepartment of Urology, Regional Headquater Hospital Gilgit, Gilgit, PAK.
Shabbar H ChangaziDepartment of General Surgery, Services Hospital Lahore, Lahore, PAK.
Fazal Ur RehmanDepartment of Urology, Shaikh Zayed Hospital Lahore, Lahore, PAK.
Farooq Hospital · PKServices Hospital · PKSir Ganga Ram Hospital · PKLahore General Hospital · PKShaikh Zayed Hospital · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background Because of the anatomical properties of the inferior calyx, lower pole stones are difficult to remove through the ureter, even if the stones are fragmented. Retrograde intra-renal surgery (RIRS) is typically employed to treat the smaller lower pole stones (1.0-2.0 cm) while percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is primarily used to treat the larger diameter stones or when RIRS has failed to clear the stones. This study was conducted to compare mini-PCNL and RIRS for the management of lower pole kidney stones in terms of stone clearance. Material and methods This randomized control trial was conducted in the Department of Urology, Shaikh Zayed Hospital, Lahore from October 2020 to December 2022. A total of 150 patients between the ages of 18 and 80 years with a kidney stone size of 10-20 mm at the lower pole were included. Patients with positive urine culture, anatomical abnormalities, uncontrolled diabetes (hemoglobin{Hb}A1c >9%), and undergone previous renal surgery were excluded. Group A patients were treated with mini-PCNL, while group B patients were managed with RIRS. Follow-up visits were planned four weeks postoperatively with CT KUB (computed tomography of kidneys, ureters, and bladder) plain to assess stone clearance. Results The mean age in group A was 43.27 ± 13.86 years, while in group B was 45.32 ± 14.14 years. Out of 150 patients, 102 (68.0%) were males and 48 (32.0%) were females. Mean size of the stone was 15.30 ± 2.21 mm. Stone clearance after mini-PCNL was found in 69 (92.0%) patients and after RIRS in 59 (78.67%) patients (p-value = 0.021). Mean hospital stay after RIRS was 1.1 ± 0.09 days, while it was 2.3 ± 0.64 days after mini-PCNL (p-value < 0.001). Two (2.67%) patients in the mini-PCNL group developed bleeding postoperatively. The stone clearance rate in older patients (51 to 80 years) was significantly higher in the mini-PCNL group than RIRS group. Similarly, the stone clearance rate in female patients and in patients with larger stones (16 to 20 mm) was found to be higher in mini-PCNL group as compared to the RIRS group. Conclusion This study concluded that both mini-PCNL and RIRS are safe and efficient techniques for treating lower pole kidney stones with a size of 11-15 mm. However, mini-PCNL has a higher stone clearance rate compared to RIRS in the treatment of stones larger than 15 mm in size. This study further suggested that patients treated with mini-PCNL had a longer hospital stay compared to patients treated with RIRS.

Indexed as

lower pole stonemini-pcnlpostoperative complicationsretrograde intrarenal surgerystone clearance

Identifiers

PMID36974241
PMCPMC10039418
OpenAlexW4321597939

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read32
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.