ArticleUrolithiasis2023
Comparative analysis of re-entry malecot and nelaton catheters after standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in adult patients: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Drainage catheters are used almost routinely to provide urinary drainage, prevent extravasation of urine, and create tamponade against bleeding after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PNL). In the literature, there is no standardized approach to determining which type of catheter is superior. In this context, we aimed to comparatively analyze two different types of catheters (re-entry malecot catheter and nelaton catheter) in terms of success and complications, which we use for drainage after a PNL operation and which have very different costs. Patients who underwent PNL for kidney stones between January 2018 and October 2022 were included in the study. The data of a total of 148 patients who had a 16-F reentry malecot nephrostomy catheter or a 16-F nelaton catheter were analyzed. In addition to the demographic characteristics of the patients, stone characteristics, operative data, hospitalization time, analgesia requirement, hemoglobin exchange, amount of blood transfusion, and postoperative data (success and complications) were comparatively evaluated. The current unit price for a reentry malecot and a nelaton catheter is 4.7 United States dollars (USD) and 0.11 USD, respectively. There were a total of 148 patients in the study, 63 of whom were nelaton catheters and 85 were reentry malecots, and the mean age was 39.95 ± 13.28 years. There was no statistically significant difference between preoperative stone sizes and residual stone rates according to the groups. In addition, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of access site and stone localization. There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of complication rates according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, Hb levels, blood transfusion rates, operation times, or hospitalization times. In conclusion, if a second procedure is planned, a reentry malecot catheter may be preferred. Apart from this situation, nelaton catheters should be preferred because they are similar to reentry catheters in terms of effectiveness, and side effects and are more economical than reentry catheters in terms of cost.
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.