Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38388440›Full record

ArticleBMC surgery2024

Experimental study of a new technique for minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy: intelligent pressure-controlled minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Zhongsheng Yang, Leming Song, Yongming Huang, Hua Chen, Ting Sun

Open access · goldAbstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 40% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhongsheng YangDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Ganzhou Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, No. 16, Meiguan Road, Zhanggong District, Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province, 341000, China.
Leming SongDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Ganzhou Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, No. 16, Meiguan Road, Zhanggong District, Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province, 341000, China.
Yongming HuangDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Ganzhou Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, No. 16, Meiguan Road, Zhanggong District, Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province, 341000, China.
Hua ChenDepartment of Urology, The Affiliated Ganzhou Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, No. 16, Meiguan Road, Zhanggong District, Ganzhou City, Jiangxi Province, 341000, China.
Ting SunDepartment of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital, Jiangxi Medical College, Nanchang University, No. 17, Yongwaizheng Street, Donghu Street, Nanchang City, Jiangxi Province, 330006, China. suntingdr@126.com.
Nanchang University · CN

Funding

Jiangxi Provincial Science Foundation Project for young scholars 20161BAB215195
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo test the reliability and safety of a newly invented technique for minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy, intelligent pressure-controlled minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy (IPC-MPCNL).

methodsEighteen kidneys of nine female pigs were randomly divided into three groups. Those in Groups A and B underwent IPC-MPCNL through the new system composed of a pressure-measuring MPCNL suctioning sheath and an irrigation and suctioning platform with pressure feedback control. The infusion flow rate was 500 ml/min in Group A and 750 ml/min in Group B. Those in Group C underwent MPCNL at an infusion flow rate of 500 ml/min. The renal pelvic pressure (RPP) monitored by a ureteral catheter and that monitored by the pressure-measuring sheath in Groups A and B were compared. The RPP in Group C was monitored by a ureteral catheter.

resultsThe RPP measured by the pressure-measuring sheath and that measured by the ureteral catheter in Group A was - 5.59 ± 1.95 mmHg and 4.46 ± 2.08 mmHg, respectively. The RPP measured by the pressure-measuring sheath and that measured by the ureteral catheter in Group B was - 4.00 ± 2.01 mmHg and 5.92 ± 2.05 mmHg, respectively. Hence, the RPPs measured by the pressure-measuring sheath in Groups A and B were consistent with those measured by the ureteral catheter. The RPP in Group C was 27.75 ± 5.98 mmHg (large fluctuations).

conclusionsIPC-MPCNL can be used to accurately monitor the RPP and maintain it within a preset safe range via suction. The new technique and the new system are safe and reliable.

Indexed as

Nephrolithotomy, PercutaneousAnimalsFemaleKidney PelvisPressureReproducibility of ResultsSuctionSwineTreatment OutcomeIntelligent controlPercutaneous nephrolithotomyRenal pelvic pressureSuction

Identifiers

PMID38388440
PMCPMC10882837
OpenAlexW4392049741

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.