Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40754902›Full record

ArticleBeijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences2025

[Surgical techniques and clinical outcomes of upper urinary tract reconstruction for stone-related ureteral strictures].

X Yu, Y Huang, X Li, C Chen, F Zhao, H Ying, Z Tao, Y Zhang, L Xu, Z Li and 4 more

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Article in Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. [Analysis of endoscopic surgical strategies for duplex kidney and ureteral malformation complicated with upper urinary tract calculi].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

X YuDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
Y HuangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
X LiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
C ChenDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
F ZhaoDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
H YingDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
Z TaoDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
Y ZhangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
L XuDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
Z LiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
K YangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
L ZhouDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
X LiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
Z ZhaoDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital, Institute of Urology, Peking University, National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo summarize the surgical strategies and to evaluate the clinical outcomes of upper urinary tract reconstruction in patients with stone-related ureteral strictures.

methodsThis retrospective study included 71 patients diagnosed with ureteral strictures secondary to urinary stones who underwent upper urinary tract reconstructive surgery at Peking University First Hospital between March 2014 and November 2023. Patient data were collected, including demographic characteristics, clinical presentation, laboratory results, imaging findings, surgical procedures, and follow-up outcomes. Ureteral strictures were classified according to anatomical location into upper, middle, lower, or multiple segments. Surgical procedures were carried out depending on the stricture characteristics. Surgical success was defined as resolution or improvement of clinical symptoms, radiographic improvement or stabilization of hydronephrosis, and maintenance of normal and stable renal function.

resultsAmong the 71 patients, 36 (50.7%) had strictures in the upper ureter, 9 (12.7%) in the middle ureter, 15 (21.1%) in the lower ureter, and 11 (15.5%) had multifocal ureteral strictures. The median stricture length was 5.0 cm (interquartile range: 3.0-15.0 cm). Surgical approach selection was individualized based on the location and extent of the stricture. For upper ureteral strictures, the most frequently employed techniques were oral mucosal graft ureteroplasty (13/36, 36.1%) and appendiceal flap ureteroplasty (8/36, 22.2%). Other options included ureteroureterostomy and ileal ureter replacement for longer or more complex strictures. In middle ureteral strictures, treatment was stratified by length: balloon dilation (1/9, 11.1%) and ureteroureterostomy (1/9, 11.1%) were applied in shorter strictures, while oral mucosal graft ureteroplasty (3/9, 33.3%) and ileal ureter replacement (4/9, 44.4%) were reserved for longer segments. For lower ureteral strictures, ureteral reimplantation into the bladder was the most common approach (10/15, 66.7%), often combined with a psoas hitch or Boari flap when necessary. All the patients with multiple segmental strictures underwent ileal ureter replacement due to the extensive nature of the disease. The median follow-up period was 14.2 months (range: 6.1-107.1 months). During follow-up, 69 of 71 patients (97.2%) achieved surgical success.

conclusionStone-related ureteral strictures present with considerable heterogeneity in terms of anatomical location, length, and complexity. Careful preoperative evaluation and individualized surgical planning are critical to successful reconstruction. With appropriate selection of surgical methods, favorable long-term clinical outcomes can be achieved in the majority of patients.

Indexed as

Plastic Surgery ProceduresUreterUreteral ObstructionUrinary CalculiUrologic Surgical ProceduresAdultAgedConstriction, PathologicFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeHydronephrosisLithotripsyReconstruction surgeryUreteral stenosisUreteroscopy

Identifiers

PMID40754902
PMCPMC12330899

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.