Trial reportWorld journal of urology2024
Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus laser lithotripsy in the treatment of post-SWL steinstrasse: a randomized comparative study.
Trial report 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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A novel regional anesthesia technique for retrograde intrarenal surgery in high-risk patients: a prospective observational study.BMC anesthesiology · 2026Observational
- A Rare Case of Emphysematous Pyelonephritis Following Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery in an Elderly Man.The American journal of case reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy of Holmium laser lithotripsy with that of extracorporeal shock lithotripsy (SWL) for post-SWL ureteral steinstrasse. MATERIALS AND
methodsFrom January 2022 to July 2023, 36 patients with post-SWL ureteral steinstrasse were randomly divided into laser lithotripsy and SWL groups. Patients with pain, moderate to marked hydronephrosis, large leading stone fragments, and showing no spontaneous resolution within 3-4 weeks after medical expulsive therapy were included. Patients with sepsis were excluded. The success rate was the primary outcome. We compared the perioperative data between the groups.
resultsThe success rate was higher in the ureteroscopy group than in the SWL group (p = 0.034). SWL was a significantly longer operation, and the fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in the SWL group than in the URS group (p = 0.027). Auxiliary procedures were more frequently performed in the SWL group than in the URS group (p = 0.02). JJ stents were inserted in 100% of patients in the URS group. Three patients (16.7%) underwent conversion to laser ureteroscopy after the second SWL session failed. No significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications was observed between the groups, but the incidence of postoperative LUT was high in the ureteroscopy group. The mean hospital stay was 30 h in the ureteroscopy group. SWL was performed without the need for hospital admission.
conclusionUreteroscopic laser lithotripsy for steinstrasse was safe and effective, with a higher success rate, shorter fluoroscopy time, and shorter recovery period than SWL.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38777909What 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.