ReviewUrology annals
Ureteral stents: A brief narrative review of the different polymeric types, their characteristics, and their connection to stent-related symptoms.
Review in Urology annals. 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.
- Clinical and procedural factors influencing ureteral stent dwell time and removal methods after endourological procedures: a systematic review.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Spontaneous Fragmentation and the Disappearing JJ Stent: A Case Series and Review of the Literature.Cureus · 2025Article
- Comparison of MemoKath™ ureteral stent versus tumor ureteral stent: A single-center long-term analysis.Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
- A randomized controlled trial comparing hydrophilic coated to uncoated polyurethane double J stents: Does it impact stent-related symptoms?Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In routine urological practice, pigtails are frequently utilized to relieve blockage. Early signs of pigtail problems include pain, lower urinary tract symptoms, pain, hematuria (54%) and fever. Seventy percent of patients experience irritable voiding symptoms, and 80% of patients or even more report pain interfering with everyday activities. Methods: This article's goal is to evaluate the various polymeric stents that are currently on the market. In addition, a review of their fundamental bioqualities is conducted, and a connection between their physical attributes (length, size, and composition) and stent-related issues is looked into. For this review, extensive Medline, PubMed, and literature research from 1987 to January 2023 was conducted. Lower urinary tract complaints, ureteral stents, "pigtail," "materials," "characteristics," or "properties" were the search terms employed. Results: The reviews and publications that are now accessible linking certain materials to stent-related symptoms offer contradictory conclusions, and the majority of research do not specify the precise properties of the materials utilized. The results of the studies on the relationship between stents length and diameter and symptoms connected to stents are likewise inconclusive, despite the fact that there are several studies on this topic in the literature. Conclusion: Numerous studies imply a connection between the various types and properties of the utilized stents and stent-related complaints. However, the available data did not fully support this claim, necessitating additional research.
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.