ArticleBMC urology2026
Effects of vacuum-assisted access sheath in mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy on early postoperative pain and analgesic requirement: a retrospective analysis.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the effect of vacuum-assisted access sheath use during mini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) on early postoperative pain intensity and analgesic requirements in the treatment of renal pelvic stones.
methodsA total of 150 patients who underwent mini-PCNL for a single renal pelvic stone ≥ 20 mm were retrospectively included. Patients who underwent standard mini-PCNL were classified as Group 1, while those treated with a vacuum-assisted access sheath were assigned to Group 2. Demographic characteristics, perioperative parameters, pain assessed by visual analog scale (VAS), and analgesic requirements were compared between the groups.
resultsThe two groups were comparable in terms of mean age, body mass index, comorbidity status, ASA scores, degree of hydronephrosis, distance between skin puncture, fluoroscopy time, stone size, and stone density (p > 0.05). Operative time and length of hospital stay were significantly longer in Group 1 (77.97 ± 15.72 min and 3.28 ± 1.56 days, respectively) compared with Group 2 (p < 0.001). The incidence of high-grade fever and urinary tract infections requiring additional antibiotic therapy was significantly higher in Group 1 (p = 0.044 and p = 0.032, respectively). Hemoglobin decrease was also more pronounced in Group 1 (p < 0.001). Postoperative VAS scores were significantly lower in Group 2 than in Group 1 (p < 0.001). The absolute between-group differences in VAS at rest were 1.37 points at 1 h, 1.68 points at 6 h, and 1.81 points at 24 h. For dynamic VAS, the corresponding absolute differences were 2.38, 2.09, and 2.05 points, respectively. Furthermore, the number of patients requiring rescue analgesia was markedly higher in Group 1 (p < 0.001). In addition, Group 1 demonstrated a shorter mean time to rescue analgesia and higher analgesic dosage compared with Group 2 (p = 0.002 and p = 0.019, respectively). In multivariate analysis, vacuum-assisted access sheath use remained an independent predictor of both lower postoperative pain scores and reduced analgesic requirement, with an approximately 90% reduction in the odds of rescue analgesia use after adjustment for operative time and intraoperative remifentanil consumption.
conclusionVacuum-assisted access sheath use was associated with lower early postoperative pain scores and reduced analgesic requirements; however, prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings.
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.