ArticleInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
Are very thin patients at a higher risk of complications when submitted to percutane-ous nephrolithotomy?
Article in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fourteen-Year Analysis of Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy Outcomes: Evolution of Technique and Future Perspectives.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo assess the impact of thinness on the outcome of the percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). MATERIALS AND
methodsA matched case-control study was performed using a prospectively collected database of all patients who underwent PCNL between June 2011 and October 2021. The patients were stratified into two groups according to their phenotypic characteristics, arbitrarily defined according to their body mass index (BMI): <0kg/m2 (Group 1, very thin patients, G<20) and ≥25 kg/m2 (Group 2, non-thin patients, G≥25). Patients were randomly matched based on Guy's Stone Score (GSS) according to case complexity at a ratio of 1:3.
resultsA total of 204 patients were enrolled in this study: 51 patients (G<20) and 153 controls (G≥25). Complications occurred in 15.2% of the patients, with 5.4% of these complications classified as major complications (Clavien grade ≥ 3). According to complications there were no significant differences between the groups. The overall complication rates were 17.6% in the G<20 and 14.4% in the G≥25 (p = 0.653). The major complication rates were 3.9% in the G<20 and 5.8% in the G≥25 (p=0.429). No differences in transfusion or urinary fistula rates were found.
conclusionsIn this study, very thin patients were not at a higher risk of complications when submitted to PCNL than in those with a BMI of ≥25 kg/m2. Apparently, this technique can be used in these patients, just as it is used in any other type of patient, independently of their BMI.
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.