ArticleCentral European journal of urology2026
Impact of prior shock wave lithotripsy on outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery for 1-2 cm lower pole kidney stones: a comparative analysis by the EAU-YAU Endourology & Urolithiasis Working Group.
Article in Central European 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The study compared the outcomes of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) performed as a second-line treatment following failed extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) with those of primary RIRS in patients with 1-2 cm lower pole kidney stones. Material and methods: A total of 83 patients who underwent RIRS for 1-2 cm lower pole renal calculi between February 2019 and September 2024 were retrospectively analyzed in this single-center study. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent RIRS after failed SWL (n = 43) and those who underwent primary RIRS (n = 40). Preoperative demographics, stone characteristics, operative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were compared. Statistical analyses were performed using R software. Results: There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of age, gender, body mass index, stone size, laterality, density, or Ito scores. The failed SWL group had significantly longer operative time (60 [55-75] vs 55 [40-66] min, p = 0.041), RIRS time (45 [37.5-55] vs 40 [30-46] min, p = 0.043), and fluoroscopy time (4 [3-7] vs 2 [2-4] s, p = 0.001). The stone-free rate was lower in the failed SWL group (79% vs 92%), but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.153). Postoperative urinary tract infections and complication rates were similar between groups (p >0.05). Conclusions: RIRS remains an effective and safe option for managing lower pole kidney stones after failed SWL. However, previous SWL may increase procedural complexity, as reflected by longer operative and fluoroscopy times. Given the retrospective single-center design and limited sample size, the study's findings should be considered exploratory and interpreted with appropriate caution pending validation in larger, multicenter cohorts.
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.