ArticleInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
External Validation and Comparison of Current Scoring Systems in Encrusted Ure-teral Stent Management: a Multicenter Study.
Article in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. 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.
- Risk analysis and nomogram-based prediction for Double-J stent encrustation: accounting for chronic kidney disease.Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2026Observational
- Investigation of current markers in predicting forgotten ureteral stent encrustation, accompanied by KUB, V-GUES and fecal scoring. here is the dilemma: does every forgotten stent become encrusted?World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Telesurgery in Urology is the Hot Topic in this Number of International Brazilian Journal of Urology.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
- Quality of Life in Patients with Ureteral Stones: Translation and Validation of the Brazilian Version of the Cambridge Ureteral Stone PROM (Br-CUSP).International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the external validation of four existing scoring systems for encrusted ureteral stents (EUS) and their relationship with stent indwelling time, stone-free rates, multiple surgery sessions, multimodal procedures, and prolonged operation times exceeding 120 minutes in total. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe data of 208 patients who underwent surgery for EUS reviewed. All EUSs were evaluated with 4 scoring systems: ESB (encrusted stone burden), FECal (forgotten, encrusted, calcified), KUB (kidney, ureter and bladder), V-GUES (visual grading for ureteral stone burden).
resultsAs the duration of stent indwelling time prolonged, a significant increase is observed in the scores of ESB, FECal, KUB and V-GUES systems (p<0.001). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, V-GUES score (p=0.025) and stent indwelling time (p=0.014) in stone-free rate, FECal grade (p<0.001) in multimodal procedure requirement, FECal (p=0.002) and V-GUES (p=0.032) scores in multiple surgery sessions, and stent indwelling time (p=0.019) and KUB score (p<0.001) in prolonged operation time were found to be predictors. When the area under receiver operating characterictic (ROC) curves (AUC) of the nomograms were examined, V-GUES score (AUC=0.685) in stone-free rate, FECal grade (AUC=0.780) in multimodal procedure requirement, FECal grade (AUC=0.845) in multiple surgery sessions, and KUB score (AUC=0.860) in prolonged operation time were found to be superior.
conclusionsThe management of EUSs is often challenging for urologists. Although the current scoring systems for EUS differ somewhat, it is important to use scoring systems to guide the management of these patients.
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.