SynthesisUrolithiasis2023
Efficacy and safety of various endosurgical procedures for management of large renal stone: a systemic review and network meta-analysis of randomised control trials.
Synthesis in Urolithiasis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The predictive value of Mayo adhesive probability (MAP) score for perioperative outcomes in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Pooled it
- 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
- A feasibility study of a novel irrigation technique for reducing intrapelvic pressure during ureterorenoscopy using conventional devices.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Prospective Evaluation of Postoperative SIRS and Serum Inflammatory Indices in Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Patients.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2026Article
- Global research trends in minimally invasive treatments for kidney stones: A bibliometric analysis (2015-2024).Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Comparison of clinical effectiveness and safety of 272 µm and 365 µm holmium lasers in retrograde intrarenal surgery.The Canadian journal of urology · 2025Article
- Comparison of three different scoring systems in predicting success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in kidney stones larger than 20 millimeters.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Article
- New infundibulopelvic angle measurement method can predict stone-free rates following retrograde intrarenal surgery.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of flexible vacuum-assisted ureteral access sheath-assisted flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy, conventional ureteral access sheath-assisted flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy, and mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy for 2-3 cm renal stones.Therapeutic advances in 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urolithiasis is the most common benign urological health condition. It has contributed sizeable burden of morbidity, disability, and medical health expenditure worldwide. There is limited high level of evidence on the efficacy and safety of treatment options of large renal stones. This network meta-analysis has examined the effectiveness and safety of various large renal stone management strategies. Systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) study design was employed to summarize comparative randomized controlled trials on humans with a diagnosis of renal stone larger than or equal to 2 cm in size. Our searching strategy was based on the Population, Interventions, Comparison, Outcomes, and Study (PICOS) approach. Medline via PubMed, Embase, Google scholar, SCOPUS, Science Direct, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to March 2023 to find eligible articles. Data extraction, screening, selection and risk of bias assessment were conducted by two independent reviewers. We found ten randomised control trials which consists 2917 patients, nine of them were labeled as low risk and one article was high risk. This network meta-analysis found that SFR was 86% (95% CI 84-88%) for Mini-PCNL, 86% (95% CI 84-88%) for standard PCNL, 79% (95% CI:73-86%) for RIRS, and 67% (95%CI:49-81 for staged URS for management of large renal stone. Overall complication rate was 32% (95% CI 27-38%) for standard PCNL, 16% (95% CI 12-21%) for Mini-PCNL, and 11% (95% CI 7-16%) for RIRS. Mini-PCNL (RR = 1.14 (95% CI 1.01-1.27) and PCNL (RR = 1.13 (95% CI 1.01-1.27)) were statistically associated with a higher SFR compared to RIRS. The pooled mean hospital stays were 1.56 days (95% CI 0.93-2.19) for RIRS, 2.96 days (95% CI 1.78-4.14) for Mini-PCNL, 3.9 days (95% CI 2.9-4.83) for standard PCNL, and 3.66 (95% CI 1.13-6.2) for staged URS. Mini-PCNL and standard PCNL were the most effective treatment options with significant morbidity and length of hospital stay, while RIRS was the safest management option with acceptable SFR, low morbidity, and short hospital stay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37289253What 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.