SynthesisWorld journal of urology2026
Urethral calculi indications and outcomes of surgical management: a systematic review by EAU endourology.
Synthesis in World 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUrethral calculi account for fewer than 1% of urinary tract stones, yet they can present as acute emergencies requiring prompt intervention. Despite this clinical relevance, contemporary urological guidelines devote little attention to their surgical management. We undertook this systematic review to consolidate the available evidence on surgical indications and outcomes for urethral calculi.
methodsMEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus and Google Scholar were searched from inception to January 2026 in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420261305468). We included studies reporting surgical management of urethral calculi with extractable outcome data. Methodological quality was evaluated using the MINORS checklist, supplemented by RoB 2 and ROBINS-I for the two comparative studies.
resultsNineteen studies published between 1976 and 2020, encompassing 689 patients, met the inclusion criteria. Acute urinary retention was the most common presentation. Retrograde manipulation with push back into the bladder was the most widely used initial approach, with holmium laser lithotripsy becoming the preferred energy source in more recent series. Stone free rates exceeded 94% across all modalities and no procedure related deaths were recorded. Coexisting urethral stricture was reported in 6-100% of patients, with prevalence closely reflecting each study's selection criteria. A stone diameter of approximately 20 mm emerged as a practical threshold separating cases suitable for minimally invasive management from those requiring open surgery.
conclusionsSurgical treatment of urethral calculi is safe and consistently effective. Stone size, anatomical location, and the presence of urethral stricture are the main drivers of treatment selection. Prospective multicentre trials with standardised definitions of treatment success are needed before formal management recommendations can be made.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42584481What 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.