ArticleCureus2026
Predictors of Residual Stone Fragments After Ureteroscopic Lithotripsy for Upper and Mid-ureteric Calculi: A Prospective Observational Study.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Residual stone fragments following ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) contribute to stone recurrence, UTI, and the need for repeat procedures. Identifying preoperative predictors of incomplete stone clearance is essential for optimizing surgical planning and patient counselling. We aimed to evaluate clinical, stone-related, and operative predictors of residual fragments after URSL for upper and mid-ureteric calculi. Methods This prospective observational study enrolled 112 patients undergoing URSL for upper and mid-ureteric calculi at a single tertiary care centre between April 2024 and October 2025. A residual stone fragment was defined as any fragment >2 mm on non-contrast CT of the kidneys, ureters, and bladder (NCCT-KUB) at one month. Univariate analysis was performed using Student's t-test, the Mann-Whitney U test, and the chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis with Youden index optimization was performed for continuous predictors. Results Stone-free status was achieved in 102 of 112 patients (91.1%), while residual fragments were identified in 10 patients (8.9%). Hounsfield unit (HU) density was the strongest predictor of residual fragments (AUC, 0.920; 95% CI, 0.802-1.000; optimal cutoff, HU ≥1329; sensitivity, 100%; specificity, 82.4%; negative predictive value (NPV), 100%). All 10 residual cases occurred exclusively in patients with HU ≥1300; no patient with HU <1300 had a residual fragment. Stone size was a significant secondary predictor (13.4 ± 2.8 mm vs. 10.9 ± 2.8 mm; p = 0.009; AUC, 0.712). Stone location, anti-retropulsion device type, sex, age, and comorbidities were not significantly associated with residual fragment formation. Conclusion Preoperative HU density on NCCT-KUB is the strongest predictor of residual stone fragments after URSL, with a threshold of HU ≥1300 identifying all patients at risk with 100% sensitivity and an NPV of 100%. A stone size of ≥13 mm is a significant secondary predictor. Routine reporting of HU density may guide preoperative counselling, surgical planning, and the intensity of postoperative follow-up.
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.