Trial reportUrolithiasis2025
Does suction in Mini PCNL mitigate rise in intrarenal pressure? A prospective randomised study.
Trial report in Urolithiasis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Intrarenal pressure and clinical outcomes during suction-assisted versus conventional percutaneous nephrolithotomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Commentary on "Does suction in mini PCNL mitigate rise in intrarenal pressure? a prospective randomised study".Urolithiasis · 2025Article
- Comments on the "Does suction in Mini PCNL mitigate rise in intrarenal pressure?"Urolithiasis · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rise in intra-renal pressure during Mini PCNL (percutaneous nephrolithotripsy) potentially leads to pyelovenous backflow and infectious complications. This prospective randomized study compares intra-renal pressure (IRP) in patients undergoing Mini PCNL (mPCNL) procedure with and without suction for renal stones. Suction mPCNL is expected to lower IRP by continuously aspirating irrigation fluid and stone fragments, thereby enhancing procedural safety. A total of 100 patients with kidney stones measuring 1-4 cm were randomized into two groups: Mini PCNL with suction (n = 50) and Mini PCNL without suction (n = 50). IRP was measured using a pressure transducer connected to a ureteral catheter. Key outcome measures included intra-renal pressure, stone-free rate, operative time, and complication rates. The suction mPCNL group demonstrated a significantly lower IRP (16.92 ± 2.93 mmHg) compared to the non-suction group (19.48 ± 4.77 mmHg, p = 0.002). The suction group also experienced shorter mean operative times (35.98 ± 14.10 min vs. 47.12 ± 15.36 min, p = 0.001) and lithotripsy times (19.50 ± 11.70 min vs. 26.24 ± 10.49 min, p = 0.003). The stone-free rate was higher in the suction group though this difference was not statistically significant. Likewise, the complication rates, including postoperative infection rates (fever and urosepsis) showed a downward trend in the suction group, however the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Suction mPCNL effectively reduces IRP, shortens operative time, maintains a comparable stone-free rate, making it a safer and more efficient alternative to traditional mPCNL. This study highlights the potential advantages of integrating suction mechanisms to control IRP and improve patient outcomes in PCNL procedures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40587017What 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.