ArticleScientific reports2026
Prediction model for additional procedure requirement in flexible ureterorenoscopy using explainable artificial intelligence.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A significant proportion of patients require additional intervention following flexible ureterorenoscopy (f-URS), a commonly performed procedure in stone surgery. This study aimed to develop machine learning (ML)–based prediction models for additional intervention after f-URS and to enhance their clinical applicability through explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) methods. A retrospective analysis was performed on 656 patients who underwent f-URS between 2015 and 2025. Demographic, clinical, anatomical, and operative variables were collected. Feature selection was conducted using Boruta, LASSO, and ElasticNet, and fourteen ML algorithms, along with ensemble approaches, were evaluated. Model explainability was assessed using SHAP, LIME, model-based importance, and permutation importance analyses.Additional intervention was required in 180 patients (27.4%), including repeat f-URS (n = 94), ureteroscopy (n = 61), extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (n = 22), and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (n = 3). The ureteropelvic junction–pelvis angle (UPJ–PA) emerged as the strongest predictor of additional intervention, with intervention rates of 84.3% below the 110° threshold compared with 2.8% above it (OR: 29.6; p < 0.001). Logistic regression demonstrated excellent discriminative performance (AUC = 0.987), while ridge classifier showed high clinical sensitivity with a low false-negative rate. Comparative explainability analyses consistently identified UPJ–PA as the dominant predictor across all methods (normalized importance score: 1.000), followed by access sheath diameter and use of flexible and navigable suction ureteral access sheaths (FANS-UAS). Robustness analysis confirmed the stability of UPJ–PA against measurement variability.ML and explainable XAI provide accurate, transparent, and clinically meaningful predictions for additional intervention after f-URS. A UPJ–PA below 110° represents a critical anatomical risk marker across all renal stone locations, while operative factors such as access sheath diameter and FANS-UAS use further influence clinical outcomes. These findings support the role of AI-based decision support systems in improving patient selection and surgical planning in routine f-URS practice.
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.