ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
Double J stenting versus non-stenting in pediatric kidney transplantation: a retrospective single-center comparative study.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeKidney transplantation (KT) is the treatment of choice for children with end-stage kidney disease. Double J stenting (DJS) has been proposed to reduce the risk of major urologic complications. However, its efficacy remains conflicting, with existing evidence limited. We aimed to evaluate the incidence of urologic and vascular complications, graft loss, and creatinine clearance in pediatric patients undergoing KT with DJS versus those without DJS.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed all pediatric patients who received KT at our institution (January 2010-December 2021). The baseline demographics, urologic and vascular complications, graft loss, and creatinine clearance at the 1-year follow-up were collected and compared between the DJS and non-DJS groups. Indications for DJS placement included the presence of unresolved uropathies posing a persistent risk to the urinary tract, anuric patients, and cases involving uretero-ureteral anastomosis.
resultsOverall, 156 KT were identified: 84 underwent KT with DJS placement, while 72 did not receive a stent. The incidence of urologic complications was higher in the DJS group than in the non-DJS group (20.8% vs 9.5%, p = 0.07), though this difference was not statistically significant. Vascular and overall complications were similar between groups. At the 1-year follow-up, graft loss and median creatinine clearance were comparable between DJS and non-DJS patients.
conclusionDJS in pediatric KT does not appear to decrease the risk of urologic complications, with graft survival and creatinine clearance at one-year follow-up being similar between non-DJS and DJS patients. Selected high-risk children might benefit more from DJS placement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41139748What 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.