Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41112708›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India

Ultraslow versus slow-rate shockwave lithotripsy in the management of renal stone: A randomized controlled trial.

Jalaram Pachaiyappan, Santosh Kumar, Santhosh Nagasubramanian, T J Nirmal, Rajiv Paul Mukha, Chandrasingh Jeyachandra Berry

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Jalaram PachaiyappanDepartment of Urology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Santosh KumarDepartment of Urology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Santhosh NagasubramanianDepartment of Urology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
T J NirmalDepartment of Urology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Rajiv Paul MukhaDepartment of Urology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.
Chandrasingh Jeyachandra BerryDepartment of Urology, Christian Medical College, Vellore, Tamil Nadu, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ultraslow shockwave (SW) lithotripsy compared with slow-rate SW lithotripsy (SWL) in the management of renal stones using a common power ramping protocol. Methods: This randomized trial enrolled patients with solitary renal calculus ≤2 cms between December 2021 and February 2024. Ultraslow lithotripsy (40 patients) was applied at a rate of 30 shocks per minute and slowrate lithotripsy (40 patients) was applied at a rate of 60 shocks per minute. Common power ramping protocol was followed for both the groups. Up to a maximum of three sessions were carried out with follow-up at 3 months after the last session. The primary outcome was the stone-free rate. Results: The overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 77.5% in the ultraslow arm and 72.5% in the slow-rate arm ( Conclusions: In the setting of an electromagnetic lithotripter with a common ramping protocol and equal energy SWs, both ultraslow and slowrate SWL achieved a comparable overall stone-free rate with a similar safety profile. Higher number of patients in the ultraslow arm, almost double that of the slow arm, attained stone-free status after the first session itself with significantly fewer shocks.

Identifiers

PMID41112708
PMCPMC12530746

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.