ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Flexible ureteroscopy in renal anomalies: an explainable AI model for surgical outcome prediction from EAU endourology.
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prediction model for additional procedure requirement in flexible ureterorenoscopy using explainable artificial intelligence.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- From data to decision: integrating causality AI and predictive analytics in endourological practice-a descriptive guide for clinicians from EAU Endourology.World journal of urology · 2026Review
- Artificial intelligence-based prediction of postoperative sepsis in patients undergoing suction mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in real world practice: a multicenter analysis from the global Suction Lechnology Utility in Mini-PCNL Study (STUMPS) registry.World journal of urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
AIM AND
objectiveFlexible ureteroscopy (fURS) is a well-established modality for managing urolithiasis in patients with congenital renal anomalies such as horseshoe kidneys (HK), malrotated kidneys (MK), and pelvic ectopic kidneys (PEK). Still, these anatomical variants present unique challenges that complicate stone clearance and procedural planning. We aim to apply machine learning (ML) and explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) techniques to identify predictors of stone-free status (SFS) following fURS in patients with anomalous kidneys.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed adult patients with HK, MK, or EK who underwent fURS and laser lithotripsy for renal stones at a tertiary referral center. A ML model incorporating clinical and intraoperative variables was developed to predict SFS. SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) values and decision tree analysis were used to interpret feature importance and model behaviour.
resultsA total of 569 cases were analysed between 2017 and 2021, with a female: male ratio of 3:1. Regarding anatomical anomalies, 50.62% had HSK, 22.67% had PEK and 26.71% had MK. Most of the patients presented with multiple (59.58%), small (76.80%) and soft stones (56.94%). MK showed the highest SFS rates, suggesting this is the most favourable anomaly for fURS. The presence of residual fragments at the end of the procedure was the strongest negative predictor of SFS, followed by longer operative time and older patient age. PEK exhibited the greatest heterogeneity in outcomes. SHAP analysis provided individualized and global insights into feature contributions.
conclusionExplainable AI offers a transparent and clinically meaningful approach to predicting SFS in patients with renal anomalies undergoing fURS. These insights can guide preoperative risk stratification and inform surgical strategy in a domain where standardised evidence is lacking.
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.