ArticleCureus2023
Supine Versus Prone Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (PCNL): A Single Surgeon's Experience.
Article in Cureus, 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Surgical Success and Predictive Factors for Residual Stones Following Supine Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in the Galdakao-Modified Valdivia Position.Medeniyet medical journal · 2025Article
- Prospective Comparative Analysis of Supine Versus Prone Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy in Patients with Complex Renal Stone Disease and Difficult Anatomy.Urology research & practice · 2024Article
- Supine tubeless upper pole PCNL under spinal anaesthesia: Safety, feasibility and outcomes from a tertiary endourology centre.Arab journal of urology · 2024Article
- Challenging the gold standard: Flank-free modified supine versus prone position in the management of complex renal stones.Urology annalsArticle
- Insights and outcomes of day-case percutaneous nephrolithotomy: results of a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis.Therapeutic advances in urologyReview
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPercutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is one of the greatest advances in the field of urology and has been considered the gold standard in the treatment of renal calculi of more than 2 cm in size. While both the supine and prone positions offer their unique advantages, it is still being debated which position offers the most in terms of surgical outcomes. We have evaluated the two approaches in terms of operative time, success rate, stone clearance rate, safety, and complications.
methodsThis prospective cohort study was done in the urology department of a tertiary care center in South India between January 2018 and October 2020. A total of 166 patients, with 83 in supine and 83 in prone positions, were included in the study.
resultsBoth groups were matched in terms of age, body mass index, stone size and location, co-morbidities, medications taken, presence of diverticular stone, history of surgery, and baseline creatinine level. Mean operative time and pain scores were noted to be less in supine position as compared to prone. Ease of puncture was superior in supine position. Stone residue was noted to be higher in supine PCNL as well.
conclusionSupine PCNLs are preferred in high-risk patients while the prone position is preferred in bilateral PCNLs, complex anatomy, or larger stone burden.
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.