ArticleBMC urology2026
Comparison of clinical outcomes between metallic and polymeric ureteral stents in malignant ureteral obstruction: a retrospective comparative study.
Article in BMC urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Clinical application progress, hot topics, controversies and future prospects of segmental metallic ureteral stents].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026Review
- Design of novel interlocked bi-layer NiTi braided stent with ultra-thin walls for urinary tract obstruction treatment.Regenerative biomaterials · 2026Article
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
backgroundThe present study compared the clinical outcomes and indications of metallic ureteral stents (MS) and polymeric ureteral stents (PS) in patients with malignant ureteral obstruction (MUO).
methodsWe analyzed 148 patients (240 ureters) with MUO who underwent ureteral stent placement at our Department of Urology between December 2014 and April 2022. The cohort included 67 patients (112 ureters) who received metallic stents (MS group) and 81 patients (128 ureters) who received polymeric stents (PS group). We evaluated overall survival and the primary underlying malignancies, and compared operative times, ureteral stent patency rates, and factors associated with stent obstruction between the two groups.
resultsThe one-year overall survival rate of patients with MUO was 27.2%, with a median survival time of 209 days. The main primary malignancies were gynecologic and gastrointestinal cancers, most commonly cervical, gastric, colorectal, breast, and ovarian cancers, in that order. The operative time for stent insertion was significantly longer in the MS group than in the PS group for both bilateral (p = 0.0004) and unilateral (p = 0.0094) placements. The one-year stent patency rate was significantly higher in the MS group (62.0%) than in the PS group (48.5%) (p = 0.0144). Factors associated with stent obstruction included lower ureteral obstruction (p = 0.0401), direct tumor compression (p = 0.0172), pyuria (p = 0.0028), and elevated preoperative serum creatinine (p = 0.0088) in the MS group, and peritoneal dissemination (p = 0.0005) in the PS group. A comparison of stent patency between the groups according to obstruction factors showed no significant differences for lower ureteral obstruction (p = 0.5140), direct tumor compression (p = 0.8215), or pyuria (p = 0.8401). However, among patients with peritoneal dissemination, the stent patency period was significantly longer in the MS group (p = 0.0001).
conclusionsMetallic ureteral stenting, which has higher patency rates than PS, is a safe and effective treatment option for MUO, particularly in the patients with peritoneal dissemination.
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.