ArticleCureus2025
Evaluation of the GUYS, S.T.O.N.E., and S-ReSC Scores in Predicting the Outcomes of Mini-Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy: A Prospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The impact of size: a systematic review and meta-analysis of tubeless versus standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy in 2171 adult patients.International urology and nephrology · 2026Pooled it
- Limitations of standard scoring systems in predicting PCNL outcomes for horseshoe kidney patients.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Risk stratification of composite adverse outcomes after percutaneous nephrolithotomy based on preoperative inflammatory-nutritional status and stone complexity: a single-center retrospective study.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives Outcomes after percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) depend on various stone-related factors that have been combined into auxiliary nephrolithometric scoring systems (NSS). Few studies have evaluated these systems in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL). We undertook this study to evaluate Guy's stone score (GSS), the S.T.O.N.E. score, and the Seoul National University Renal Stone Complexity (S-ReSC) score for predicting stone-free status (SFS) and complications after mini-PCNL. Methods Data of patients aged 18 years and older who underwent mini-PCNL between July 2022 and June 2024 for renal stones >10 mm in largest diameter were analyzed. The clinical, perioperative, and radiological characteristics of the patients were recorded. The GSS, S.T.O.N.E., and S-ReSC scores were calculated and compared with the SFS, complications, and perioperative findings. The complete absence of stones on postoperative imaging confirmed the success of mini-PCNL. The modified Clavien-Dindo classification system was used to classify complications. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the performance of the scores. Results A total of 410 patients were included in this study. SFS was achieved in 84.4% of the cases, and complications occurred in 10.7%. All three NSSs demonstrated a statistically significant association with SFS and complications. The AUC values of the GSS, S.T.O.N.E., and S-ReSC scores for predicting SFS were 0.7172, 0.7212, and 0.7174, respectively. The predictive power for complications was inferior to that for SFS, with AUCs of 0.6112, 0.6113, and 0.6259, respectively. Conclusion All scores showed good predictive ability for SFS and, to a lesser extent, for complications after mini-PCNL. None of the scores outperformed other scores.
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.