ArticleThe Canadian journal of urology2025
Role of J stent as a minimally invasive treatment option for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.
Article in The Canadian journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Pediatric ureteral stenting: state-of-the-art review.World journal of urology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of this study was to investigate the factors affecting treatment success in children that got either pyeloplasty or J stent placement in ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). PATIENTS AND
methodsThe study comprised 126 patients who either J stent placement or pyeloplasty performed by the same physician for UPJO from 2012 to 2022. The criteria for surgical intervention adhered to the European Association of Urology (EAU) recommendations. Symptomatic patients with verified obstruction, with a split renal function (SRF) over 40%, low-grade hydronephrosis (Society of Fetal Urology grade 2), and an obstructive segment measuring less than 1 cm, had Double-J stent placement. Furthermore, in infants exhibiting poor health or development retardation, a J stent was inserted as a temporary measure to alleviate obstruction and maintain renal function, notwithstanding the recommendation for pyeloplasty.
resultsThe treatment success rate was 43.9% in the J stent group and 88.4% in the pyeloplasty group, with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.001). The kind of procedure (pyeloplasty vs. stent) was the sole independent prognostic factor predicting treatment success (HR: 4.77, p < 0.001) in the multiple logistic regression analysis. No statistically significant change was observed in preoperative and postoperative SRF (48% vs. 48.5%, p = 0.923) among patients with stent failure, confirming a transient preservation of functional advantage.
conclusionThe placement of a stent may have restricted success rates in specific patients with UPJO. Preserving renal function may be advantageous until definitive surgery, particularly in cases where there are hazards associated with anesthesia and invasive procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40567087What 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.