Trial reportUrolithiasis2023
A randomized controlled trial comparing infectious complications using mini perc with and without suction for renal stones less than 3 cm in size.
Trial report in Urolithiasis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Trial
- Does suction in Mini PCNL mitigate rise in intrarenal pressure? A prospective randomised study.Urolithiasis · 2025Trial
- Assessment of Effectiveness and Safety of Aspiration-Assisted Nephrostomic Access Sheaths in PCNL and Intrarenal Pressures Evaluation: A Systematic Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose was to do a study to compare infectious complications in patients operated for MiniPerc or Minimally invasive Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy (MPCNL) using MIP and MPCNL with suction using Shah Superperc sheath for medium-sized renal stones less than 3 cm in size. The primary objective of this study is to compare the infectious complications and the secondary objectives are to compare stone-free rates, complication rates and operative times. A prospective randomized controlled trial with patients having proximal ureteral and renal stones of 10-30 mm size and planned for MPCNL done at a single institute. A total of 80 consecutively admitted patients with written informed consent were included for randomization with 40 patients in each arm of MPCNL and suction MPCNL. The median age in MPCNL and suction MPCNL arms were 48 and 49 years, the median stone size of 15.45 and 16.7 cm, the Median stone volume of 1576.2 vs 1752 mm
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.