Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38565776›Full record

ArticleUrolithiasis2024

A proposed mathematical model to help preoperative planning between RIRS and MiniPerc for renal stones between 10 and 20 mm using holmium:Yag laser (Cyber Ho): the stone management according to size-hardness (SMASH) score.

D Perri, F Mazzoleni, U Besana, A Pacchetti, E Morini, M Calandriello, A L Pastore, J Romero-Otero, F Bruyere, M C Sighinolfi and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Urolithiasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

16 authors.

D PerriDepartment of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy. perri.davide90@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2714-0006
F MazzoleniDepartment of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy.
U BesanaDepartment of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy.
A PacchettiDepartment of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy.
E MoriniDepartment of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy.
M CalandrielloDepartment of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy.
A L PastoreDepartment of Urology, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy.
J Romero-OteroDepartment of Urology, Hospital Universitario, 12 De Octubre, Madrid, Spain.
F BruyereDepartment of Urology, Bretonneau Hospital, Tours, France.
M C SighinolfiDepartment of Urology, Ospedale San Paolo, Milan, Italy.
B RoccoDepartment of Urology, Ospedale San Paolo, Milan, Italy.
S MicaliDepartment of Urology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.
A S GozenDepartment of Urology, SLK-Kliniken Heilbronn, Heilbronn, Germany.
E LiatsikosDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
J B RocheDepartment of Urology, University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
G BozziniDepartment of Urology, Azienda Socio Sanitaria Territoriale Lariana, Como, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To evaluate the performance of a mathematical model to drive preoperative planning between RIRS and MiniPerc (MP) for the treatment of renal stones between 10 and 20 mm. Patients with a renal stone between 10 and 20 mm were enrolled. A mathematical model named Stone Management According to Size-Hardness (SMASH) score was calculated: hounsfield units (HU) χ stone maximum size (cm)/100. Patients were divided into 4 groups: RIRS with score < 15 (Group A), RIRS with score ≥ 15 (Group B), MP with score < 15 (Group C), MP with score ≥ 15 (Group D). Cyber Ho device was always used. Stone free rate (SFR) was assessed after 3 months. Complication rate and need for auxiliary procedures were evaluated. Between January 2019 and December 2021, 350 patients were enrolled (87, 88, 82 and 93 in Groups A, B, C and D). Mean stone size was 13.1 vs 13.3 mm in Group A vs B (p = 0.18) and 16.2 vs 18.1 mm in Group C vs D (p = 0.12). SFR was 82%, 61%, 75% and 85% for Groups A, B, C and D. SFR was comparable between Groups C and D (p = 0.32) and Groups A and C (p = 0.22). SFR was significantly higher in Group A over B (p = 0.03) and in Group D over B (p = 0.02). Complication rate was 2.2%, 3.4%, 12.1%, 12.9% for Groups A, B, C, D. RIRS and MP are both safe and effective. The mathematical model with the proposed cut-off allowed a proper allocation of patients between endoscopic and percutaneous approaches.Registration number of the study ISRCTN55546280.

Indexed as

Kidney CalculiLasers, Solid-StateNephrostomy, PercutaneousHardnessHolmiumHumansTreatment OutcomeHolmiumHolmiumHounsfield unitsMiniPercRIRSScoreYAG laser

Identifiers

PMID38565776

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.