ArticlePloS one2025
Long-term Double-J stenting is superior to short-term Single-J stenting in kidney transplantation.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Choosing the optimal ureteral stent design, size, and material in different situations: a review from the European association of urology endourology.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- An evidence-based review by the EAU Endourology on standard practices and future directions for ureteral stents in transplant patients.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery yields superior long-term oncological outcomes compared to traditional laparoscopic surgery in stage II-III rectal cancer.American journal of cancer research · 2025Article
- Effects of Leuprorelin combined with Mirena on endocrine function, emotion, quality of life, and endometrial receptivity in patients with adenomyosis.American journal of translational research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesUrological complications after kidney transplantation, due to the ureteroneocystostomy, are associated with significant morbidity, prolonged hospital stay and even mortality. Ureteral stents can minimize the number of complications but are not consistently used, as previous studies were retrospective in nature. We aim to prospectively determine the most effective stenting approach.
methodsWe performed a non-blinded single-centre randomised controlled trial in an academic hospital. Kidney transplant recipients were randomised to either a Single-J stent or a Double-J stent, removed according to respective protocols. Primary outcome was PCN placement within six months. Secondary outcomes encompassed urinary tract infections, cost-effectiveness, and hospital admission time. The study was conducted from November 2018 to August 2023, during which 300 recipients were included with complete follow-up.
resultsPCN was performed in 14.5% in the Single-J group (21/145) and 4.5% in the Double-J group (7/155), p = 0.003. Multivariable logistic regression, corrected for recipient age, BMI, sex, and donor type, showed an OR of 0.26 [0.10, 0.61] (OR [95%CI]). To prevent PCN in one recipient, 10 would have to receive the Double-J. All secondary outcomes were comparable, whereas hospital admission time and cost-effectiveness analysis heavily favoured Double-J stenting. An important limitation was that Single-J participants were unable to leave, even if their recovery allowed earlier discharge.
conclusionThis trial showed that Double-J stenting consistently reduced urological complications from 14.5% to 4.5%, while being highly cost-effective. Transplant surgeons should favour Double-J stenting to minimise the risk of complications.
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.