ArticleUrolithiasis2024
Predictive value of NCCT quantitative analysis for proximal and middle impacted ureteral stones.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Measuring and analyzing objective factors of impacted ureteral stones on Non-Contrast Computed Tomography (NCCT): a retrospective case-control study.Urolithiasis · 2026Article
- Study on the diagnostic efficacy of the computerized tomography attenuation value of renal pelvis urine in true bacteriuria secondary to renal and ureteral stones.Renal failure · 2025Article
- Pathological and radiological evaluation of ureteral wall thickness measurement in urolithiasis.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a non-invasive nomogram for predicting proximal ureteral impacted calculi.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Ureteral Wall Thickness Measurement and Spontaneous Stone Passage A Narrative Review.Current urology reports · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to explore the predictive value of preoperative quantitative NCCT analysis for proximal and middle ureteral stone impaction. Data of 128 patients who diagnosed with proximal and middle ureteral stones were analyzed. Stone size, upper diameter of the ureter(D1), lower diameter of the ureter (D2), CT attenuation of the ureter above the stone (HA, 'HU above'), CT attenuation of the ureter below the stone (HB, 'HU below'), CT attenuation values of the stone's proximal segments (C1), CT attenuation values of the stone's distal segments (C2), and ureteral wall thickness(UWT)were recorded. Logistic regression was used to perform univariate and multivariate analyses of the data to determine the independent predictors of proximal and middle ureteral stone impaction. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted to evaluate the predictive performance. Among the 128 patients, 52 (40.6%) had impacted stones, while 76 (59.4%) did not. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that stone size > 9.45 mm (OR = 1.372, 95% CI = 1.071-1.756, P = 0.012), UWT > 3.22 mm (OR = 4.217, 95% CI = 2.165 ~ 8.213, P < 0.001)、DDR > 2.10 (OR = 4.901, 95% CI = 1.797 ~ 13.365, P = 0.002)and HBA > 1.58 (OR = 5.237,95% CI = 1.502 ~ 18.259, P = 0.009)were independent risk factors for predicting ureteral stone impaction. In conclusion, stone size, UWT, DDR, and HBA show crucial predictive value for impaction of stones.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39174805What 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.