ArticleUrology research & practice2025
Reporting the Impact of Pelvicalyceal System (PCS) Anatomy on Clinical Outcomes in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery (RIRS) Studies: Can We Do Better? - Methodological Review from the Section of EAU Endourology.
Article in Urology research & practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Retrograde Intrarenal Renal Surgery versus Supine Mini Percutaneous Nephrolithotripsy in Treatment of Renal Pelvic Stones Less than 2 cm, Randomized Clinical Study.Urology research & practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2025
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To analyze available randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with other modalities for urinary stone treatment to determine the extent of comparing the pelvicalyceal system (PCS) anatomy between patients. In December 2024, a search was conducted in databases and was limited to publications that describe comparisons of experimental and control groups in the context of RIRS for stones only in the kidney (PCS). Only RCTs comparing RIRS with other modalities without publication date restriction were included due to their highest level of evidence in the hierarchy of primary research. The parameters used in the selected studies were analyzed to compare the differences between the groups, focusing on PCS anatomy. The final analysis included 27 publications from 2421 articles. The presence and/or degree of hydronephrosis were analyzed in 8 studies. Direct morphometric measurements were compared in 4 studies and were focused on the lower pole only, namely the infundibulopelvic angle, infundibular length, and infundibular width. Features such as the position of the renal pelvis in relation to the kidney parenchyma (intrarenal, extrarenal), number and orientation of calyces, as well as the existing PCS classifications were not compared or used. This review shows gaps in the literature while assessing and reporting on PCS anatomy in studies with RIRS. Unless studies mention these anatomical factors without excluding certain groups of patients, it is difficult to compare outcomes between modalities and in between studies.
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.