Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38431764›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2024

Risk factors of high fluid absorption in patients treated with mini-PCNL: a single-center prospective study.

Luyang Zhang, Enguang Yang, Suoshi Jing, Hui Ding, Yunxin Zhang, Junqiang Tian, Junsheng Bao, Jun Mi, Qiqi He, Zhilong Dong and 4 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

14 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luyang ZhangInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Enguang YangInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Suoshi JingInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Hui DingInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Yunxin ZhangInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Junqiang TianInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Junsheng BaoInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Jun MiInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Qiqi HeInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Zhilong DongInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Li YangInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Juan WangInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Qihui ZhengInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China.
Zhiping WangInstitute of Urology, Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Gansu Nephro-Urological Clinical Center, Lanzhou, 730030, China. wangzplzu@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8140-591X
Lanzhou University Second Hospital · CN

Funding

Departamento de Investigaciones Científicas y Tecnológicas, Universidad de Santiago de Chile CY2020-BJ04Innovative Research Group Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China 81874088Key Laboratory of Gansu Province for Urological Diseases 054000278Natural Science Foundation of Gansu Province 22JR5RA980
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe factors influencing fluid absorption in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy (mini-PCNL) are still unknown. We aim to investigate the factors that influence irrigation fluid absorption during mini-PCNL.

methodsA total of 94 patients who underwent mini-PCNL were included in this prospective study. The endoscopic surgical monitoring system (ESMS) was used to measure the volume of irrigation fluid absorbed during the procedure. Irrigating time, the total volume of irrigation fluid, stone size, S.T.O.N.E. score, hemoglobin, electrolyte levels, and postoperative complications were recorded.

resultsA significant correlation was observed between fluid absorption and the presence of postoperative fever, and based on this phenomenon, patients were divided into low and high fluid absorption groups. The serum creatinine level in the high fluid absorption group was significantly high (7 vs. 16.5, p = 0.02). Significant differences were observed between the low and high fluid absorption groups in terms of mean stone size (21.70 mm vs. 26.78 mm), presence of stone burden ≥ 800 mm

conclusionsMean stone size, presence of stone burden ≥ 800 mm

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiLithotripsyNephrostomy, PercutaneousHumansProspective StudiesRisk FactorsTreatment OutcomeComplicationsEndoscopic surgical monitoring system (ESMS)Fluid absorptionIntra-operative monitoringMini-percutaneous nephrolithotripsy

Identifiers

PMID38431764
OpenAlexW4392349518

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.