ArticleCureus2025
Evaluation and Management of Ureteric Calculi in a Secondary Care Hospital in Northeast India: An Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aim Ureteric calculi are a common urological condition that affects a large number of individuals globally. In Nagaland, Northeast India, the incidence is increasing, likely due to the consumption of high-fat, meat-based, and spicy foods. This study aims to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) in the management of ureteric stones. Specifically, it assesses therapeutic outcomes and postoperative complications associated with each modality. Materials and methods This observational study included 101 patients with ureteric calculi measuring 5-20 mm. Diagnosis was established using X-ray of the kidneys, ureters, and bladder (KUB), ultrasonography KUB, or CT scan. Patients were treated with ESWL (n = 20, 19.8%) or URSL (n = 81, 80.2%). Preoperative assessments included hematological and biochemical profiling and serum creatinine measurement. Postoperative complications were documented. Ethical clearance was obtained from the Institutional Ethics Committee of Christian Institute of Health Sciences and Research (ref. no. 022/202223/IEC-CIHSR; registration no. ECNEW/INST/2020/782). Results The majority of patients were male (n = 72, 71.3%) and aged 30-50 years (n = 63, 62.4%). Flank pain was the most common presenting symptom (n = 88, 87.1%). ESWL was performed exclusively for proximal stones (n = 20, 100%), whereas URSL was used for both distal (n = 37, 45.7%) and proximal stones (n = 44, 54.3%). Stone-free rates were 18/20 (90.0%) for ESWL and 69/81 (85.2%) for URSL (p = 0.849). Postoperative complications occurred less frequently in the ESWL group (n = 1, 5%) than in the URSL group (n = 18, 22.2%). Conclusions ESWL is effective for proximal stones smaller than 10 mm, whereas URSL is effective for stones up to 15 mm, regardless of location. Both ESWL and URSL achieved high stone-free rates with acceptable postoperative complications, with ESWL showing slightly fewer complications for proximal stones and URSL demonstrating effectiveness for stones at all locations.
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.