ArticleUrolithiasis2024
The association between novel negative pressure ureteroscopic lithotripsy combined with flexible ureteroscopy versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy on stone-free rates: implications for clinical practice and policy.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The correlation between novel negative pressure ureteroscopic lithotripsy (NP-URL) combined with flexible ureteroscopy (FU) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) on stone-free rates (SFR) remains unclear. There is a lack of evidence from Chinese populations regarding the relationship between SFR and NP-URL combined with FU (NP-URL-FU) versus PCNL. We aimed to assess the association between NP-URL-FU and PCNL on SFR. We conducted a cohort study involving 166 participants with 2-4 cm kidney stones. Data on SFR (7 days and 2 months) were collected from all participants. Logistic regression analysis was used to substantiate the research objectives. NP-URL-FU versus PCNL showed an 86% decrease in the 7-day SFR (OR = 0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.29). The results remained stable even after adjusting for potential confounders. However, no statistically significant association was found between the surgical method and the 2-month SFR. Further exploratory subgroup analyses showed no significant interactions, with all P values > 0.05. Among patients with 2-4 cm kidney stones, NP-URL-FU was associated with a lower risk of incident 7-day SFR than PCNL. However, no statistically significant difference was found in the long-term stone removal rate. Therefore, NP-URL-FU may be a viable alternative surgical option for patients seeking minimally invasive procedures.
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.