ArticleCardiovascular and interventional radiology2025
Predictors of Nephrostomy Catheter Dislodgement: Insights from a Retrospective Analysis.
Article in Cardiovascular and interventional radiology, 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.
- Dwell time of percutaneous nephrostomies in pregnancy - what is the optimal exchange interval?BMC urology · 2026Article
- Article
- Commentary on, "Predictors of Nephrostomy Catheter Dislodgement: Insights from a Retrospective Analysis".Cardiovascular and interventional radiology · 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
purposeTo identify the anatomical and technical factors associated with unintended nephrostomy catheter dislodgement (NCD). MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective review of 742 percutaneous nephrostomy (PCN) procedures carried out between June 2020 and June 2024 was conducted. Thirty-eight patients with spontaneous NCD were assigned to the dislodgement group, and 38 matched controls were selected using propensity score matching.. Key measurements included cortex-to-skin distance, paravertebral muscle area, psoas muscle area, subcutaneous fat thickness, and renal parenchymal thickness.
resultsPatients with NCD were similar in age and sex. No significant differences were observed in subcutaneous fat thickness, muscle thickness, or renal parenchymal thickness between the groups. However, cortex-to-skin distance was significantly shorter in the NCD group (p = 0.001). ROC analysis identified an optimal threshold of 46.65 mm for cortex-to-skin distance, with a sensitivity of 92.1%, specificity of 39.5%, and a positive predictive value of 60.3% (AUC = 0.67).
conclusionShorter cortex-to-skin distance is a key predictor of NCD. Patients with shorter cortex-to-skin distances, may benefit from closer monitoring and targeted preventive measures to reduce the risk of dislodgement.
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.