SynthesisThe Canadian journal of urology2026
Effectiveness and safety of external physical vibration lithecbole for upper urinary stone expulsion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in The Canadian 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesThe external physical vibration lithecbole (EPVL) is a new device. It is clinically employed to improve the stone-free rate (SFR). However, it is not widely accepted in clinical practice due to the lack of high-level evidentiary support and a standard protocol. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of external physical vibration lithecbole (EPVL) as an adjunct to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) or retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for upper urinary tract stones.
methodsWe systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and the Cochrane Library from inception to 13 January 2026, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing EPVL plus standard care with standard care alone, and we pooled relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
resultsNine RCTs involving 1418 patients were analyzed. Compared with standard care alone, EPVL significantly increased early stone-free rates at about 1 week (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.18-1.77, p < 0.001) and 2 weeks (RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.20-1.63, p < 0.001) after ESWL or RIRS, with greater benefit for lower-pole (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.25-1.96, p < 0.001) and renal pelvic stones (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.10-2.14, p = 0.01). EPVL was associated with a lower rate of overall complications (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.73, p < 0.001); specifically, it was linked to lower risks of hematuria (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.86, p = 0.002) and urinary tract infection-related findings (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14-0.57, p < 0.001).
conclusionsAdjunctive EPVL improves short-term stone clearance after ESWL or RIRS without adding measurable risk and may also be associated with a reduced incidence of complications. Where available, EPVL can be considered as a non-invasive option to enhance fragment clearance, particularly for lower-pole renal stones. Further multicenter trials are needed to confirm long-term outcomes and generalizability.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42024600537.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42086350What 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.