ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2026
Healthcare resource utilization comparing single-use ureteroscopes with real-time intrarenal pressure monitoring to other single-use ureteroscopes.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study compared post-procedure healthcare resource utilization with LithoVue™ Elite (LVE) single-use digital flexible ureteroscope with pressure monitoring vs. other (non-pressure sensing) single-use ureteroscopes.
methodsThis retrospective, real-world study used the Premier PINC AI™ Healthcare Database. Adults aged ≥18 years undergoing ureteroscopy (URS) with lithotripsy between January 1, 2024, and March 1, 2025, with ≥30-day post-URS followup were included. The primary outcomes were 10- and 30-day hospital resource utilization (HRU), a composite measure of emergency department (ED) visits or inpatient admission. Propensity score matching (1:3) balanced baseline characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression in the matched cohort adjusted for residual confounding.
resultsA total of 305 patients underwent LVE with pressure monitoring capability (mean [standard deviation (SD)] age 58.6 [16.1], 51.1% female) and 15 048 underwent other single-use ureteroscopes (mean [SD] age 58.7 [15.8], 51.7% female). After matching, 292 LVE patients were compared with 876 controls. Patients undergoing LVE with pressure monitoring capability experienced improved HRU outcomes at 10-day (4.5% vs. 8.7%; absolute risk reduction [ARR] 4.2 pp, p=0.016) and 30-day (7.2% vs. 12.0%; ARR 4.8 pp, p=0.019) vs. other single-use ureteroscopes. In adjusted analyses, LVE with pressure monitoring capability was associated with lower odds of HRU at 10-day (odds ratio [OR] 0.355, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.175-0.718, p=0.004) and 30-day (OR 0.473, 95% CI 0.281-0.797, p=0.005). The odds of 10-day ED visits (OR 0.385, 95% CI 0.149-0.997, p=0.049) and 30-day inpatient admissions (OR 0.436, 95% CI 0.196-0.967, p=0.041) were significantly lower with LVE with pressure monitoring capability.
conclusionsUse of LVE with pressure monitoring capability was associated with clinically meaningful reductions in early post-URS HRU vs. other single-use ureteroscopes.
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.