ArticleArab journal of urology2025
Percutaneous nephrostomy tube versus double J ureteric stent for the management of non-septic calcular anuria in adults: Prospective randomized study.
Article in Arab journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of initial drainage method on retrograde intrarenal surgery outcomes in acute calcular pyelonephritis: a prospective comparative study.Urolithiasis · 2026Trial
- Impact of Percutaneous Nephrostomy on Pain, Quality of Life, Family Burden, and Depressive Symptoms: A Prospective Observational Study.Sisli Etfal Hastanesi tip bulteni · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare the use of JJ and PCN tubes as initial urinary drainage methods in patients with obstructive calcular anuria. Methods: Between January 2021 and January 2024, 239 eligible patients with obstructive calcular anuria were randomly classified into two groups. Group A (JJ group) included 121 patients and group B (PCN group) included 118 patients. Laboratory data, stone characteristics, and intraoperative and postoperative data were also collected. The time needed to normalize the serum creatinine levels, postoperative complications, and quality of life scores were assessed. Results: The procedures had comparable success rates (86.8% vs. 90.7%; Conclusions: Both PCN and JJ stents had comparable success rates. PCN was associated with a lower incidence of LUTS, higher incidence of spontaneous stone passage, and better quality of life scores than the JJ stent.
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.