ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Comparison of three different scoring systems in predicting success of retrograde intrarenal surgery in kidney stones larger than 20 millimeters.
Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Factors Associated with Uncomplicated Single-Session Stone-Free Status After Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery for Large Renal Stones.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Review
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
purposeTo evaluate stone free rate (SFR) predictivity of three different scoring systems in patients with kidney stones larger than 20 millimeters undergoing retrograde intrarenal surgery(RİRS).
methodsDigital records of a total of 166 patients were reviewed retrospectively. Epidemiological characteristics (age, gender, medical history) of the patients, stone and affected kidney characteristics (size, volume, location, density, opaque, presence of urinary system anomaly, presence of stones in different calyx, number of stones, lower pole stone, renal infundibulopelvic angle (IPA), renal infundibulopelvic length (RIL), hydronephrosis), and operative characteristics (preoperative ureteral stent, operation duration, postoperative residual fragments, hospitalization time and complications were recorded. Each patient was scored separately according to the Resorlu-Unsal Scoring System (RUSS), the modified Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity (S-ReSC) and R.I.R.S scoring systems based on the stone characteristics seen on CT.
resultsAll three methods had statistically acceptable sensitivity and specificity values. Sensitivity for R.I.R.S nomogram is 62.3%, specificity is 77.1% (cut-off: 7.5 points, area under the curve (AUC):0.735, p < 0.001), sensitivity for RUSS nomogram is 60.7%, specificity is 77.9% (cut off: 2.5, AUC = 0.749, p < 0.001), sensitivity for the Modified S-ReSC nomogram was determined as 65.6% and specificity as 71.2% (cut off: 2.5, AUC = 0.743, p < 0.001). The residual stone ratio was found to be higher in the presence of lower pole stone. While the cut-off value for IPA was 44.5°, this value was calculated as 24.5 mm for RIL.
conclusionThree scoring systems demonstrate accceptable sensitivity and specificity in predicting stone free rate(SFR) with stones ≥ 20 mm. Multivariate analysis highlighted the superiority of the R.I.R.S. scoring system for SFR predictivity. In the presence of lower pole stones, IPA and RIL are important factors in predicting surgical success.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39729283What 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.