ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
Meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and safety of percutaneous nephrostomy
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of Percutaneous Nephrostomy on Pain, Quality of Life, Family Burden, and Depressive Symptoms: A Prospective Observational Study.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2026Article
- Article
- Time to Decompression in Obstructive Urosepsis from Ureteral Calculi: Thresholds, Initial Diversion, and Early Biomarkers: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Comparing outcomes of ureteric stent versus nephrostomy tube in urosepsis: a population-based study in Ontario, Canada.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Analysis of the incidence and risk factors of fever-related ureteral stent-associated urinary tract infection in pediatric patients: a retrospective study.Translational pediatrics · 2025Article
- Micropercutaneous nephrostomy for intervention in acute upper urinary tract calculi obstruction with hydronephrosis and infection.Scientific reports · 2024Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The debate regarding the optimal drainage method for acute obstructive upper urinary tract infection persists, focusing on the choice between percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) and retrograde ureteral stenting (RUS). Aims: This study aims to systematically examine the perioperative outcomes and safety associated with PCN and RUS in treating acute obstructive upper urinary tract infections. Methods: A comprehensive investigation was conducted using the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases up to December 2022, following the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) statement. The utilized keywords included 'PCN', 'RUS', 'acute upper obstructive uropathy', and 'RCT'. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies providing accurate and analyzable data, which incorporated the total subject count, perioperative outcomes, and complication rates. The assessed perioperative outcomes included fluoroscopy time, normalization of temperature, normalization of serum creatinine, normalization of white blood cell (WBC) count, and operative time. Safety outcomes encompassed failure rate, intraoperative and postoperative hematuria, postoperative fever, postoperative pain, and postoperative nephrostomy tube or stent slippage rate. The study protocol was prospectively registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022352474). Results: The meta-analysis encompassed 7 trials involving 727 patients, with 412 assigned to the PCN group and 315 to the RUS group. The outcome of the meta-analysis unveiled a reduced occurrence of postoperative hematuria in the PCN group [odds ratio (OR) = 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30-0.99, Conclusion: Given the significant impact of hematuria and catheterization failure on postoperative quality of life, the preference for PCN appears more advantageous than RUS.
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.