SynthesisWorld journal of urology2026
Clinical and procedural factors influencing ureteral stent dwell time and removal methods after endourological procedures: a systematic review.
Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUreteral stents are routinely used following endourological procedures to ensure adequate drainage and prevent obstruction. However, stent-related morbidity remains common, and optimal stent dwell time and removal methods are not well defined. This systematic review aimed to evaluate clinical and procedural factors influencing ureteral stent dwell time and the methods used for stent removal after endourological interventions.
methodsA systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and registered on PROSPERO. MEDLINE and Embase were searched from inception to October 2025. Randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies evaluating ureteral stent dwell time and/or removal methods in adults undergoing endourological procedures were included. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools.
resultsThirty-two studies encompassing 4,373 patients were included. Reported stent dwell times varied widely, most commonly ranging between 10 and 14 days in uncomplicated cases, with longer durations associated with increased rates of encrustation and removal difficulty. Removal techniques included rigid cystoscopy (48.7%), flexible cystoscopy (19.9%), extraction strings (23.5%), and device-assisted methods (7.9%). Less invasive approaches, particularly flexible cystoscopy and extraction-string removal, were consistently associated with reduced pain scores and improved patient comfort, although extraction strings carried a small risk of premature dislodgement.
conclusionsWhile practice patterns vary, the evidence suggests that a 10-14 day dwell time might be the optimal window to balance healing with the prevention of encrustation. Less invasive removal approaches, particularly flexible cystoscopy and extraction-string techniques, were generally associated with lower pain scores and high procedural success rates in selected patients. While these methods are safe and better tolerated, extraction strings carried a small, reproducible risk of premature dislodgement. High-quality prospective studies are needed to define determinant-based, individualized stent management strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42069921What 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.