Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40079924›Full record

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.

Mert Hamza Özbilen, Mehmet Çağlar Çakıcı, Erdem Kısa, Taylan Tığlı, Berk Yasin Ekenci, Burak Tüfekçi, Hilmi Sarı, İbrahim Güven Kartal, Ahmet Nihat Karakoyunlu, Gökhan Koç and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyValidation StudyComparative Study
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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 Urology
    Article
  4. 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

12 authors.

Mert Hamza ÖzbilenDepartment of Urology, Health Sciences University Adana City Training and Research Hospital, Adana, Turkey.
Mehmet Çağlar ÇakıcıDepartment of Urology, Istanbul Medeniyet University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Erdem KısaDepartment of Urology, Medicana International Izmir Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.
Taylan TığlıDepartment of Urology, Health Sciences University Izmir Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.
Berk Yasin EkenciDepartment of Urology, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Burak TüfekçiDepartment of Urology, Istanbul Medeniyet University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Hilmi SarıDepartment of Urology, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
İbrahim Güven KartalDepartment of Urology, Health Sciences University Kütahya Evliya Celebi Research and Training Hospital, Kütahya, Turkey.
Ahmet Nihat KarakoyunluDepartment of Urology, Ankara Etlik City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Gökhan KoçDepartment of Urology, Izmir University of Economics Medicalpoint International Hospital, Izmir, Turkey.
Asıf YıldırımDepartment of Urology, Istanbul Medeniyet University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Hakan ErçilDepartment of Urology, Health Sciences University Adana City Training and Research Hospital, Adana, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

StentsUreteral CalculiAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOperative TimeReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeFactor Analysis, StatisticalStentsUrolithiasis

Identifiers

PMID40079924
PMCPMC12052030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.