SynthesisWorld journal of urology2026
Comparison of the efficacy and safety of metallic ureteral stent versus polymer ureteral stent for patients with malignant ureteral obstruction: a meta-analysis of comparative trials.
Synthesis in World journal of 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 and Radiological Findings in Endorectal Migration of a Metallic Ureteral Stent.Clinics and practice · 2026Article
- 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
purposeThis study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical performance of metallic and polymer ureteral stents in patients with malignant ureteral obstruction (MUO), with a focus on complications and success rates.
methodsWe conducted a meta-analysis of seven studies, obtained by searching various databases from inception to February 2025, involving patients with MUO treated with metallic or polymer stents. Study quality was assessed using the RoB 2 tool for randomized controlled trials and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. Primary outcomes included success rates at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months, and complication rates. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. When data were available, exploratory analyses were performed according to metallic stent type.
resultsThe success rates at 3, 6, and 12 months were consistently higher in patients with metal stents (ORs 5.14, 2.70, and 3.67, respectively) than in those with polymer stents. The overall rate of complications did not differ significantly between the two groups; however, a higher risk of complications was observed in studies using covered metallic stents (OR 4.45, 95% CI 1.57–12.62).
conclusionsCompared with polymer ureteral stents, metallic ureteral stents demonstrated higher success rates in patients with MUO, particularly at longer follow-up, albeit with an increased risk of complications. These findings suggest that metallic stents may represent a favorable option in carefully selected patients.
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.