ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2023
Kidney stone management in the era of miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy: does it improve safety? a prospective cohort study.
Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- F-URS with FANS versus mPCNL for 2-3 cm UUTS: a RCT with a subgroup analysis of 2-2.5 cm stones.BJU international · 2026Trial
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
to compare the safety and the efficacy of standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (sPCNL) vs. mini PCNL (mPCNL). Methods: The authors conducted a prospective single-centre cohort study over a 2-year period of all consecutive patients who underwent sPCNL or mPCNL for 2-4 cm renal stones. Patients with active urinary tract infection, abnormal coagulopathy state, malformative uropathies and multitract-access procedures were excluded. In total, 90 patients underwent sPCNL using a 30 Fr access sheath with 24 Fr nephroscope while 52 patients underwent mPCNL using a mPCNL system: 12 Fr nephroscope and a 16.5/17.5F access sheath. Blood loss estimation was assessed postoperatively after 6 h by considering haemoglobin drop and blood transfusion if required. Stone free rate at 1 month was defined by the absence of stone or residual fragments less than or equal to 3 mm on computed tomography scan. Results: Stone characteristics were comparable in both treatment arms. The mean stone size was comparable for sPCNL and mPCNL groups (32.6±10.8 mm vs. 29.4±11.8 mm). Operative time was longer in the mPCNL group (124±40.4 min vs. 95.8±32.3 min, Conclusion: Both sPCNL and mPCNL have shown good outcomes in this indication. Although the stone free rate was equal for both techniques, hospital stay, bleeding and transfusion rate are much lower with the use of mPCNL.
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.