ArticleCentral European journal of urology2026
Comparison of the effects of commonly used double-J stents on stone-free rates and ureteral stent-related symptoms after lithotripsy for upper urinary tract stones.
Article in Central European 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
Introduction: Evidence on the impact of different stent sizes on stone-free rate (SFR) and ureteral stent-related symptom questionnaire (USSQ) scores in endoscopic lithotripsy remains limited. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of 2 commonly used double-J stents of different diameters on these outcomes. Material and methods: We retrospectively reviewed 108 patients with upper urinary tract stones who underwent lithotripsy between January 2022 and December 2023. Patients were stratified into 4.7F and 6F groups based on stent diameter. Primary outcomes were SFR at 24 h and 30 days. USSQ scores and complications were compared between groups. Results: SFR was similar between groups at 24 h (52.5% vs 55.1%; p = 0.791) and 30 days (74.6% vs 77.6%; p = 0.719). USSQ scores were comparable (Urinary Symptoms: 29 vs 29, p = 0.473; Body Pain: 12 vs 12.5, p = 0.347; General Health: 13 vs 13, p = 0.706; Work Performance: 8 vs 8, p = 0.072; Sexual Matters: 4 vs 3, p = 0.242; Additional Problems: 12 vs 12, p = 0.485). More patients in the 4.7F group reported hematuria (83.1% vs 69.4%; p = 0.094) and changes in daily work activities. Many experienced body pain (76.9%) and absence of sexual activity (88.9%). No complications exceeded grade II. Conclusions: Both 4.7F and 6F stents showed similar efficacy and safety. Stent size did not significantly impact USSQ scores or SFR.
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.