Trial reportBMC urology2026
Comparison of suction and standard ureteral access sheath versus sheathless flexible ureteroscopy in management of upper ureteral and renal calculi.
Trial report 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeComparative effectiveness of suction versus traditional ureteral access sheath (UAS) remains an area of ongoing research. We aim to compare the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) with suction and standard UAS versus without UAS in the management of renal and upper ureteric stones, with a specific focus on operative efficiency, stone-free rates, and postoperative complications.
methodsThis study was conducted between October 2023 and January 2025, including 90 patients with renal stones ≤ 3 cm and upper ureteric stones ≤ 1.5 cm. Patients were divided into three groups by random Allocation Software (version 2): Group A1 (standard UAS, n = 30), Group A2 (suction UAS, n = 30), and Group B (no UAS, n = 30). Operative time, vision quality, stone clearance, complications, and hospital stay were assessed.
resultsGroup A2 had the shortest mean operative time (70.1 ± 10.3 min) with significantly better vision compared to Group A1 (114.3 ± 27.0 min) and Group B (125.0 ± 28.01 min) (p < 0.001). Residual stone rates were lowest in Group A2 (3.3%) compared to Group A1 (10.0%) and Group B (26.7%) (p = 0.035). The need for a second procedure was significantly higher in Group B (26.7%) compared to Group A1 (10.0%) and absent in Group A2 (p = 0.002). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in Group A2 compared to Group A1 and Group B (p = 0.005). Fever incidence (Clavien Grade II) was significantly higher in Group B (23.3%) compared to Group A1 (16.7%) and absent in Group A2 (p = 0.005).
conclusionSuction ureteral access sheaths in flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy for renal stones ≤ 3 cm and upper ureteric stones ≤ 1.5 cm was associated with improved stone clearance, reduced operative time and hospital stay, provide better endoscopic vision, minimized infectious complications and need for second procedure, compared to standard UAS or no sheath. However, outcomes may be influenced by surgeon experience and familiarity with suction-assisted systems. Prospective multicenter studies with larger sample sizes and varying surgeon experience levels are recommended.
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.