ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2025
Impact of suction ureteral access sheath in ureteroscopy/retrograde intrarenal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Outcomes following surgical management of urinary stone disease in older patients.The Canadian journal of urology · 2026Article
- Article
- The global flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS) survey on utility, practices and future needs in flexible ureteroscopy: a EAU Endourology, PEARLS and IAU collaboration.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- Review
- 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Advances in technology have led to the introduction of the suction ureteral access sheaths (SUASs) in ureteroscopy (URS) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), with their clinical benefits becoming widely acknowledged. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of using SUASs during URS and RIRS. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in April 2024 across the MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. Our focus was on studies investigating the use of SUASs during URS/RIRS for urinary stones. To compare the stone-free rate (SFR) and perioperative outcomes between URS/RIRS procedures with and without SUASs, standard pairwise meta-analyses were conducted. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were employed utilizing a random-effects model (PROSPERO: CRD42024538956). Results: Seven studies (n=1,746) were identified. The use of SUASs significantly improved immediate SFR compared to non-SUAS group (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.47; P=0.03), while no significant difference was observed in SFR at one month follow-up. The use of SUASs significantly reduced operation time (MD: -7.98 minutes; 95% CI: -13.46 to -2.50; P=0.004) and overall complication rate (RR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.71; P<0.001). Conclusions: Our meta-analyses indicate that the use of SUASs during URS/RIRS significantly improves immediate SFR and offers better perioperative outcomes compared to no use of SUASs. To establish SUASs as standard of care, well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed.
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.