Observational studyWorld journal of urology2026
Endoscopic treatment strategies for ureteral stricture in patient with single kidney: triple-stent and metal ureteral stent.
Observational study 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the safety and feasibility of triple Double-J (DJ) stents and Allium metal ureteral stents (AMUS) for treating ureteral strictures (US) in solitary kidney (SK) patients.
methodsWe prospectively collected clinical data from 100 patients with SK who underwent triple stent or AMUS treatment for US at our center between January 2019 and March 2022. During follow-up, we evaluated surgical success rates, changes in renal function parameters, and the incidence of complications.
results100 patients freely chose their treatment methods based on their own medical preferences and financial circumstances. During the 1-year follow-up period, the overall success rates for triple-stent treatment (58 renal units) and AMUS treatment (53 renal units) were similar (79.3% vs. 81.1%, p = 0.81). Although the triple-stent group showed a numerically higher trend in pain (7.5% vs. 12.1%, p = 0.532), hematuria (5.7% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.719), urinary tract infection (UTI) (7.5% vs. 13.8%, p = 0.366), and lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) (5.7% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.719), the two groups exhibited statistically comparable incidences of surgical complications. The one-year total cost for triple-stent treatment was only 63.1% of the AMUS treatment group ($9,099.0 vs. $14,411.0, p < 0.001). One year after surgery, the two groups showed similar outcomes, with significant improvements in hydronephrosis, serum creatinine, and blood urea nitrogen levels, and maintained effective renal function.
conclusionsOur center has innovatively presented the triple-stent strategy for treating US in patients with SK. A one-year follow-up demonstrated that both triple-stent and AMUS treatments effectively and safely managed US in SK patients. During the short-term follow-up period, the triple-stent group offered greater economic advantages. CLINICAL
trial registrationName of the registry: Research Registry, Registration identifier: researchregistry7266, Hyperlink to your specific registration: https://www.researchregistry.com .
Indexed as
Identifiers
42606733What 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.