Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39633425›Full record

ArticleTrials2024

Stent Omission after Ureteroscopy and Lithotripsy (SOUL) in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC): study protocol for a pragmatic prospective combined randomized and observational clinical trial.

Russell E N Becker, Stephanie Daignault-Newton, Elaina Shoemaker, Dennis Sitek, Jennifer M Thelus, Sabrina Clark, Adam Martin-Schwarze, Catherine Spino, Noelle E Carlozzi, William J Meurer and 3 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in Trials, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05866081 (Stent Omission After Ureteroscopy and Lithotripsy in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT05866081 narecruitingnot on this map

Stent Omission After Ureteroscopy and Lithotripsy in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (SOUL MUSIC)

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of MichiganRan2023 to 2026Enrolled792ConditionsStone, Kidney, Stone UreterArmsStandard of care stent placement, No stent placement, Surveys
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Stent is a bane for urologists.World journal of urology · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Reply by Authors.The Journal of urology · 2025
    Article
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

13 authors.

Russell E N BeckerDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Stephanie Daignault-NewtonDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Elaina ShoemakerDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Dennis SitekDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Jennifer M ThelusDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. jmthelus@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-5952-9833
Sabrina ClarkDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Adam Martin-SchwarzeDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Catherine SpinoDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Noelle E CarlozziCenter for Clinical Outcomes Development and Application, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
William J MeurerDepartment of Emergency Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Anne E SalesSinclair School of Nursing, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.
Casey A DauwDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Khurshid R GhaniDepartment of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Funding

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute CER-2021C2-22856
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUreteral stents are placed by urologists to ensure ureteral patency in the postoperative period following ureteroscopy to treat kidney stones, with the goal to reduce complications. However, ureteral stents themselves cause pain and urinary symptoms in many patients that can lead to morbidity. Professional society guidelines support stent omission after uncomplicated ureteroscopy, which represents most cases. Despite this, ureteral stents are utilized in more than 80% of all ureteroscopy procedures. One reason for guideline discordance is the low level of evidence supporting stent omission recommendations. Studies are inconclusive on whether stents increase pain and complications. A recent Cochrane review concluded higher quality and large trials are needed to inform decision-making. Furthermore, there is a lack of studies evaluating health-related quality of life (HRQOL), patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and unplanned healthcare utilization. Another factor is that prospective clinical trials are hindered by patient reluctance to be randomized to either stent placement or omission. The outcomes of patients who decline randomization have been ignored in trials, limiting the generalizability of the evidence.

methodsThrough collaboration with patient partners, we developed a pragmatic multi-center combined randomized and observational cohort study in a quality improvement collaborative. Patients will be prospectively enrolled into a randomized cohort in which assignment to ureteral stent omission (vs. placement) is determined in the operating room using a web-based randomization platform. Patients who decline randomization are invited to take part in an observational (real-world) cohort in which the determination of stent use is at the discretion of the urologist. Patients in both cohorts will complete preoperative and postoperative assessments of PROs including pain, urinary symptoms, interference with usual activities, time taken off work or school, and treatment satisfaction. Unplanned healthcare utilization within 30 days postoperatively will be assessed by review of the electronic health record. Severe adverse events will be recorded. A subgroup of patients and urologists will also participate in qualitative semi-structured interviews focusing on knowledge, preferences, and practice patterns regarding ureteral stenting. Interview transcripts will be thematically analyzed. DISCUSSION: This study is designed to evaluate the HRQOL and 30-day healthcare utilization of patients undergoing ureteral stent omission compared to stent placement following uncomplicated ureteroscopic treatment of upper urinary tract stones. Additionally, patient and urologist opinions and preferences related to ureteral stenting will be explored through qualitative interviews, with the aim of identifying key barriers and facilitators of practice change related to stenting practices.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05866081. Registered on 19 May 2023.

Indexed as

LithotripsyMulticenter Studies as TopicPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicStentsUreteroscopyHumansKidney CalculiMichiganObservational Studies as TopicPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresProspective StudiesQuality of LifeRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeKidney stonesLithotripsyNephrolithiasisPatient-reported outcomesPractice patternsStent-related symptomsSurgical decision-makingUreteral stentsUreteroscopy

Identifiers

PMID39633425
PMCPMC11616357

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.