Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39169348›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2024

Optimizing the outcome of non-pre-stented flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy regarding the quality of life, when to remove the stent?

Zhihao Fu, Haijie Xie, Junkai Huang, Fu Zhu, Hongwei Gao, Chunyu Liu

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

6 authors.

Zhihao Fu *Department of Urology, Tianjin Institute of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, NO.23 Pingjiang Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, CN, 300211, People's Republic of China.
Haijie Xie *Department of Urology, Tianjin Institute of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, NO.23 Pingjiang Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, CN, 300211, People's Republic of China.
Junkai HuangDepartment of Urology, Tianjin Institute of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, NO.23 Pingjiang Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, CN, 300211, People's Republic of China.
Fu ZhuDepartment of Urology, Tianjin Institute of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, NO.23 Pingjiang Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, CN, 300211, People's Republic of China.
Hongwei GaoDepartment of Urology, Tianjin Institute of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, NO.23 Pingjiang Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, CN, 300211, People's Republic of China.
Chunyu LiuDepartment of Urology, Tianjin Institute of Urology, The Second Hospital of Tianjin Medical University, NO.23 Pingjiang Road, Hexi District, Tianjin, CN, 300211, People's Republic of China. prof_liucy@163.com.

Funding

Science and Technology Project of Tianjin 21JCYBJC01300Science and Technology Project of Tianjin 22YDTPJC00190Scientific Research Program of Tianjin Education Commission 2021KJ228Tianjin Health Research Project TJWJ2022ZD004
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo investigate the safety of short-term stenting following flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (fURL) for patients without preoperative stents. Retaining double-J stent for 1-2 weeks after fURL is a common practice. At present, data on short-term stenting after non-pre-stented fURL is still lacking.

methods182 patients who met inclusion criteria were retrospectively divided into the 2-days group (2-day removal, 76 cases) and the 1-week group (1-week removal, 106 cases). The study endpoint was stent-associated adverse symptoms assessed by follow-up and completed validated questionnaires on postoperative days (POD) 7 and 12. A postoperative imaging review was performed 1 month after the surgery.

resultsNo statistical differences were found in the patients' demographic and stone-related characteristics. The 2-days group showed fewer urinary tract symptoms and lower scores on the ureteral stent symptom questionnaire on POD 7: less backache during urination (p = 0.004), less hematuria (p = 0.031), less frequent urination (p = 0.004), lower urinary symptoms index (p < 0.001), lower general health index (p < 0.001), and lower performance index (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in fever (p = 0.372), visual analogue scale score (p = 0.760), and painkiller requirements (p = 0.160) on POD 7. The average general health score and work performance score remained significantly higher in the 1-week group patients at 5 days after removal compared to the 2-days group patients at 5 days after removal. (p < 0.001, p = 0.005). Five patients in the 2-days group and 15 patients in the 1-week group returned to the emergency department for additional treatments. No patient required rehospitalization. Stone-free rates were 85.5% in the 2-days group and 80.2% in the 1-week group (p = 0.499), respectively, and none of the patients got aggravating hydronephrosis.

conclusionsCompared to the common 1-week stent removal option, short-term stenting after non-pre-stented fURL is safe, which can enhance the patient's quality of life.

Indexed as

Device RemovalLithotripsyQuality of LifeStentsUreteroscopyAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUreteral CalculiUreteroscopesdouble-J stentFlexible ureteroscopic lithotripsyStentlessUrinary stones

Identifiers

PMID39169348
PMCPMC11337566

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.