ArticleBMC urology2025
Case report of a giant kidney stone removed by transperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy.
Article in BMC urology, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn cases of long-standing giant kidney stones resulting in irreversible loss of renal function, frequent urinary tract infections and a chronic flank pain that cannot be managed by other treatment options nephrectomy is considered the only effective treatment option. The largest KS documented in the literature weighed 2260 g and was treated by nephrectomy; while the largest stone removed without nephrectomy weighed 1350 g. There are no documented cases of KS over 200 g being removed by laparoscopic surgery. The preserved excretory function supported proceeding with pyelolithotomy rather than nephrectomy.
objectiveWe hereby present a case of a giant KS in a functioning kidney of the female patient. She had previously (> 15 years ago) undergone an open left nephrolithotomy which made the procedure more challenging. She underwent successful transperitoneal laparoscopic pyelolithotomy. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe patient, aged 55, underwent an kidney-preserving transperitoneal laparoscopic left-sided pyelolithotomy due to the presence of a large staghorn stone in a functioning kidney. Because kidney function was salvageable, nephrectomy was not considered.
resultsA successful kidney-preserving surgery was performed, without the occurrence of any surgical complications. The postoperative period was characterized by a brief duration of hospital stay.
conclusionLaparoscopic pyelolithotomy is a safe and effective surgical technique for the removal of large and complex KS. The minimally invasive approach ensures a rapid recovery process, minimal blood loss, reduced postoperative pain, and improved cosmetic results. However, it should be noted that the method requires highly skilled surgeons and advanced laparoscopic instruments were used (30° laparoscope, trocars, atraumatic graspers, maryland dissectors, monopolar/ultrasonic energy, and barbed suture for pyelotomy closure).
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.