SynthesisWorld journal of urology2026
Metallic versus polymeric ureteric stents for chronic malignant ureteric obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
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
backgroundChronic malignant ureteric obstruction compromises renal function and may disrupt oncological management. Conventional polymeric stents are limited by external compression, encrustation, and frequent exchange requirements. Metallic stents were developed to enhance long-term patency; however, comparative evidence remains heterogeneous.
methodsA PRISMA-compliant systematic review of PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Scopus (31 May 2025) identified comparative studies of metallic versus polymeric ureteric stents in adults with chronic malignant ureteric obstruction. Random-effects meta-analysis evaluated stent failure, stent-related symptoms, and Clavien-Dindo complications using risk ratios. Functional duration, renal outcomes, quality of life, and cost implications were synthesised narratively.
resultsSix retrospective cohort studies encompassing 511 patients and 595 ureteric stents met inclusion criteria. Metallic stents showed a trend toward lower stent failure compared with polymeric stents (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.44-1.03; I² = 0%, p = 0.07). Stent-related symptoms and complication rates were comparable. Metallic stents demonstrated fewer exchange requirements in narrative synthesis, although renal function, quality-of-life, and cost outcomes could not be pooled because of inconsistent reporting.
conclusionsMetallic ureteric stents are a feasible long-term alternative to polymeric stents for selected patients with chronic malignant ureteric obstruction, with potential benefits in reducing exchange burden. Current evidence is not practice-changing and remains limited by retrospective designs, clinical heterogeneity, and sparse patient-centred and cost-effectiveness data. TRIAL REGISTRY: Prospero: CRD420251021868.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42637852What 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.