Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38966022›Full record

ReviewActa clinica Croatica2023

REVIEW ON COMPLICATIONS AND ADVERSE EFFECTS OF METALLIC URINARY STENTS.

Duje Rako, Petra De Graaf, Federico Soria

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta clinica Croatica, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

3 authors.

Duje RakoCroatia Polyclinic, Zagreb, Croatia.
Petra De GraafDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Federico SoriaJesús Usón Minimally Invasive Surgery Centre, Caceres, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Urinary stents, be it urethral or ureteral, polymeric, metallic or biodegradable, are one of the most frequently used tools in urology and they have been used for decades in prophylactic and therapeutic setting. Although relatively low invasive, they are prone to complications and adverse effects so much that complication rates up to 100% have been described. Many reviews have focused either on specific groups of patients or particular stent types, materials or designs but so far, no comprehensive review on complications has been published. To tackle this issue, a working group was set up within ENIUS (European Network of multidisciplinary research to Improve Urinary Stents) tasked with literature search in order to screen for and systematically review published stent complications in urethra (male only) and ureters (polymeric and metallic ureteral stents in both sexes) when used in obstructed systems. In this paper, we review, catalogue and summarize complications published for metallic urethral and ureteral stents.

Indexed as

StentsHumansMaleMetalsPostoperative ComplicationsUreterMetalsAlloyComplicationsMetalMetallicReviewStentUreteralUretericUrethralUrinary

Identifiers

PMID38966022
PMCPMC11221226

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.