ArticleBMC urology2024
The relationship between map scores and complications after standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy.
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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The predictive value of Mayo adhesive probability (MAP) score for perioperative outcomes in percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL): a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Age-dependent predictive limitations of the MAP score in standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Predictive performance of Triple-D, Quadruple-D, and Mayo adhesive probability scores in ESWL for renal stones: a retrospective cohort study.Urolithiasis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUpper urinary tract stones are a common condition in urology clinics. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is an effective procedure frequently used for the treatment of stones larger than 2 cm. MAP scoring is used to predict oncological outcomes and intraoperative complications after partial nephrectomy by using the thickness and adhesion of perinephric adipose tissue. We examined the relationship between MAP score and clinical and demographic findings of the patients, especially postoperative Hgb drop and postoperative complications. MATERIAL-
methodPatients were divided into 2 groups: Those with MAP score < 3 and ≥ 3. The impact of the MAP score on the demographic, clinical, and surgical parameters of the groups was assessed and analyzed. The relationship between MAP score and complications based on Clavien Dindo classification was also examined. The study investigated factors affecting the development of complications, the amount of bleeding, and the influence of MAP scores on these outcomes.
resultsThe Hgb drop was 2.56 ± 1.00 in the group with a MAP score ≥ 3 which was statistically significantly higher than the group with a MAP score < 3 (1.43 ± 1.21) (p < 0.001). The stone-free rate was 81.7% in the group with a MAP score < 3, which was statistically significantly higher than the group with a MAP score ≥ 3 (59.6%) (p = 0.012).
conclusionAs the MAP score of patients scheduled for standard PNL operation increased, there was a corresponding rise in Hgb drop, a decline in stone-free rates and an uptick in postoperative urinary complications of postoperative urinary infections.
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.