ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
Clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes of suction-assisted ureteral access sheaths in retrograde intrarenal surgery: evidence from a propensity score-matched cohort.
Article in World journal of urology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of suction-assisted ureteral access sheath (S-UAS) and traditional UAS (T-UAS) for retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) in a retrospective single-center cohort study.
methodsPatients who underwent RIRS between January 2020 and January 2025 were included. Propensity score matching was used to balance baseline characteristics between groups. The primary outcomes were stone-free rates (SFRs), complication profiles, intraoperative visibility (rated on a Likert scale), and cost-effectiveness.
resultsFollowing matching, 180 patients (90 per arm) remained. The S-UAS group had a significantly shorter operative time (60.3 vs. 71.9 min, p = 0.007), greater SFR (90% vs. 78.9%, p = 0.040), and lower complication rate (11.1% vs. 25.5%, p = 0.012). Visibility scores significantly improved in the S-UAS arm at the middle and late phases of the operation. Despite higher entry costs, S-UAS had lower costs per stone-free patient ($1958 vs. $2253) and an encouraging incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $126 per additional SFR outcome.
conclusionThe S-UAS enhances the success of RIRS by improving visibility, reducing infectious complications, and increasing the SFR. It may seem more expensive at first, but it ultimately proves to be more economical in the long run. These findings support broader adoption of S-UASs in clinical practice; however, prospective, randomized studies are needed to validate these results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41528506What 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.