Observational studyWorld journal of urology2026
Is 3 cm the upper limit of stone size for effective steerable ureteroscopic renal stone evacuation?
Observational study 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe CVAC® Aspiration System is a novel device designed to actively evacuate stone fragments during ureteroscopy. While recent studies have validated its safety, the precise upper limit of stone size for this treatment is undefined. We aimed to determine the ideal size and volume thresholds using CVAC for steerable ureteroscopic renal evacuation (SURE) procedures.
methodsA retrospective, observational study of patients undergoing SURE procedures by a single surgeon between August 2023 and April 2025 was undertaken. Stone size and volume were quantified using preoperative CT imaging. The primary outcome was stone-free status, based on Endourological Society criteria for CT, or <5 mm for ultrasound/X-ray. Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve analyses were performed to estimate optimal cut-off values for stone size and volume.
resultsStones in 55 kidneys of 50 patients were removed with this approach. The majority had significant medical co-morbidities (82% ASA Class 3 or 4). The median stone size was 24.0 mm, and the overall stone-free rate (SFR) was 63.6%. For stones smaller than 2 cm, the SFR was 95.7%. ROC analysis identified a stone size of 30.9 mm (AUC 0.895) and a volume of 1501.1 mm³ (AUC 0.834) as predictive cut-offs for clearance. The volume threshold increased to 2264.6 mm³ with utilization of the CVAC 2.0 device. The overall complication rate was 12%, without any high-grade complications.
conclusionsThe SURE procedure with the CVAC device may be effective for treating patients with stones up to 3 cm in size or volumes less than 2200 mm³. Well-designed, randomized prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.