ArticleJournal of medicine and life2023
Double-J stent versus percutaneous nephrostomy for emergency upper urinary tract decompression.
Article in Journal of medicine and life, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of citrate-based nutraceutical combinations and their impact on chemolysis in the management of urinary diversion device: a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study on improved quality of life and clinical outcomes.World journal of urology · 2025Trial
- Time to Decompression in Obstructive Urosepsis from Ureteral Calculi: Thresholds, Initial Diversion, and Early Biomarkers: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparing outcomes of ureteric stent versus nephrostomy tube in urosepsis: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Analysis of efficacy factors in unilateral obstructive severe renal insufficiency: a single-centre retrospective study.BMC nephrology · 2025Article
- Case Report: Acute kidney injury due to minimal dilated obstructive nephropathy in the context of gastric cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Urinary tract obstruction is a serious condition that can cause significant morbidity in patients with acute obstructive uropathy. Prompt urinary diversion is necessary to prevent further damage to the kidneys. Retrograde ureteral stenting (RUS) and percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) are the two main treatment options for this condition in many hospitals. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of PCN and RUS for treating acute obstructive uropathy. We conducted a retrospective study of 1500 consecutive patients who presented to the emergency room between January 2017 and December 2021 and underwent either double-J stenting or percutaneous nephrostomy. Patient characteristics and anatomic data were evaluated using abdominal ultrasonography, computed tomography, blood tests, and/or KUB radiography. Out of the 1500 patients, 1172 patients underwent double-J stenting, while 328 patients received percutaneous nephrostomy initially. In 54 cases where double-J stenting was inefficient, subsequent percutaneous nephrostomy was performed. The majority of cases were efficiently treated with double-J stenting. Double-J stenting was an effective method of urinary drainage in most cases of acute obstructive uropathy.
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.