Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38430305›Full record

ArticleLangenbeck's archives of surgery2024

Comparison of traditional and suctioning ureteral access sheath during retrograde intrarenal surgery in the treatment of renal calculi.

Lujia Wang, Zijian Zhou, Peng Gao, Yuanyuan Yang, Qiang Ding, Zhong Wu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Langenbeck's archives of surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.3field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lujia Wang *Department of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 12 Middle Wulumuqi Rd, Shanghai, 200040, People's Republic of China.
Zijian Zhou *Department of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 12 Middle Wulumuqi Rd, Shanghai, 200040, People's Republic of China.
Peng Gao *Department of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 12 Middle Wulumuqi Rd, Shanghai, 200040, People's Republic of China.
Yuanyuan YangDepartment of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 12 Middle Wulumuqi Rd, Shanghai, 200040, People's Republic of China.
Qiang DingDepartment of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 12 Middle Wulumuqi Rd, Shanghai, 200040, People's Republic of China.
Zhong WuDepartment of Urology, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, 12 Middle Wulumuqi Rd, Shanghai, 200040, People's Republic of China. drzhongwu2020@163.com.
Fudan University · CNHuashan Hospital · CNShanghai Medical College of Fudan University · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 81970603 and No. 82100807
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aims to compare the efficiency and clinical outcomes between the suctioning ureteral access sheath (UAS) group and the traditional UAS group during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for kidney stones and explore the impact of suctioning UAS on postoperative infectious complications.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 162 patients with kidney stones who underwent RIRS with a traditional UAS (n = 74) or a suctioning UAS (n = 71) between March 2021 and May 2023.

resultsThe mean operative time in suctioning UAS group (39.03 ± 18.01 s) was significantly shorter than that (49.73 ± 20.77 s) in the traditional UAS group (P = 0.037). The mean postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the suctioning UAS group (1.57 ± 0.82d) compared with the traditional UAS group (2.30 ± 1.6 2 d) (P = 0.032). The instant SFRs were significantly higher in the suctioning UAS group (88.73%) than in the traditional UAS group (75.68%) (P = 0.040). The overall SFR in suctioning UAS group (92.96%) was slightly higher than the traditional UAS group (85.14%). The incidence of overall complications was significantly higher in the traditional UAS group (35.14%) than in the suctioning UAS group (16.90%) (P = 0.013). In multivariate analysis, female patients (OR 0.053, P = 0.018), positive urine WBC (OR 10.382, P = 0.034), operative time > 60 min (OR 20.231, P = 0.032), and the application of traditional UAS (OR 0.042, P = 0.017) were independent risk factors associated with infectious complications.

conclusionWe demonstrated that suctioning UAS provided a higher instant SFR and fewer postoperative infectious complications during RIRS, and patients with predictable risk factors for infectious complications could potentially benefit from the use of the suctioning UAS.

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiUreterFemaleHumansLength of StayMultivariate AnalysisPostoperative ComplicationsRetrospective StudiesInfectious complicationsIntrarenal pressureKidney stoneRetrograde intrarenal surgerySuctioning ureteral access sheath

Identifiers

PMID38430305
OpenAlexW4392348515

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.