ArticleWorld journal of urology2023
Ureteroscopy in the elderly: safety and functional results.
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 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ureteroscopy for stone disease in the elderly. is it safe and effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2025Pooled it
- Effect of esketamine vs sufentanil adjunct to propofol deep sedation on the incidence of oxygen-desaturation in elderly patients undergoing urologic surgeries: a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Outcomes following surgical management of urinary stone disease in older patients.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
- Safety and Efficacy of Flexible Ureteroscopy for Renal Stone Disease in Elderly Patients: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Is ureteroscopy and active stone treatment safe and effective in octogenarians? A review of current literature.Arab journal of urology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ureteroscopy (URS) for urinary stones treatment in patients ≥ 80 years of age.
methodsFrom 2012 to 2021, 96 patients ≥ 80 years underwent URS for urinary stone disease. Patients' demographics and surgical outcomes were examined.
resultsThe median length of follow-up was 25 months. Median age was 84 years. Half of the patients (53%) were ASA score 3 and 16% ASA 4. Mean stone diameter (SD) was 10.6 mm, and mean procedure time was 78 min. Eighty-three patients underwent follow-up imaging (ultrasonography or computed tomography) with a median time of 31 days. Stone-free rate was 73.9%. Twenty patients (20.7%) experienced a minor complication [Clavien-Dindo (CD) I-II] whereas five (5.7%) experienced a major complication (CD III-V). SD ≥ 10 mm predicted CD III-V complications (OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01-1.55, p = 0.03). Urinary drainage prior the procedure with double J stent, nephroureteral stent or percutaneous nephrostomy tube had no impact on patients' SFR [74.6% in the drained group versus 64.0% in the undrained group (p = 0.44)] nor on major complications (OR 4.68, 95% CI 0.25-87.77, p = 0.30).
conclusionIn elderly patients, URS for treatment of renal and ureteral stones is a relatively efficient and safe procedure. The risk of major complications is low, and the only associated risk factor found was SD ≥ 10 mm. Urinary drainage prior the procedure did not affect patients' outcomes.
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.