ArticleBMC urology2026
Machine learning to predict ureteral access sheath placement failure in flexible ureteroscopy: development and prospective validation.
Article in BMC 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFailed placement of a Ureteral Access Sheath (UAS) during flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy (FURL) creates significant operative challenges. The objective of this study was to develop a machine learning (ML) model that integrates diverse indicators to predict the likelihood of UAS placement failure.
methodsWe conducted an analysis of clinical records from 1,153 patients diagnosed with upper urinary tract calculi, followed by the enrollment of 265 consecutive patients for independent prospective validation. The predictive model integrated variables including patient medical history, parameters from CT imaging, anesthesia modality, and markers of systemic inflammation. Nine distinct ML algorithms were formulated. The predictive performance of the model was subsequently compared with that of senior urologists in a prospective setting.
resultsThe final dataset comprised retrospective (n = 651) and prospective (n = 265) cohorts, both exhibiting similar failure rates of approximately 30%. Among the tested algorithms, the RF model yielded superior performance, attaining an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.845 in the testing set. During prospective validation, the simplified RF model achieved an AUC of 0.872, significantly surpassing the predictive accuracy of senior urologists. Through SHAP analysis, the mid-ureteral diameter, distal ureteral diameter, neutrophil count, renal parenchyma width, and the long diameter of the calculus were identified as the five most critical predictors. Furthermore, the model exhibited robust stability across various subgroups.
conclusionsWe successfully developed and prospectively validated a robust ML model capable of predicting UAS placement failure. By assimilating clinical, imaging, and inflammatory data, this model demonstrated superior performance compared to clinical experts. It provides a dependable instrument for personalized preoperative risk stratification and surgical strategy planning, accessible via a newly deployed web application.
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.