ArticleWorld journal of urology2026
The durability and effectiveness of hydrogel retrieval method for urinary stone fragments: an in-vitro study.
Article 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the effectiveness of MediNik hydrogel for retrieval of stone fragments of varying sizes and to assess how application technique influences its performance.
methodsAn in vitro experimental study was conducted using blood sample containers, natural stone fragments ranging from 0.2 to 2 mm, a 7.5 Fr single-use flexible ureteroscope, and a 2.2 Fr endoscopic basket. The MediNik system consists of a blue alginate component (K1) and a yellow calcium-based activator (K2) that interact to form a hydrogel. The evaluated parameters included K1:K2 ratios (2:1, 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3), stone fragment size (0.2-0.45 mm, 0.45-0.6 mm, 0.6-1.0 mm, 1-2 mm, and mixed fragments), application method (surface application versus delivery of K1 into the fragment mixture), and waiting time (3, 5, and 10 s).
resultsHydrogel performance was strongly influenced by the application technique. Effective integration of the two components occurred when K1 was delivered directly into the stone fragments and K2 was subsequently applied, particularly at K1:K2 ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3. Successful retrieval was achieved across all fragment sizes, including mixed fragments. Surface application of the components alone did not consistently produce a stable hydrogel clot.
conclusionsStable MediNik hydrogel clot formation was achieved at K1:K2 ratios of 1:1, 1:2, and 1:3 when K1 was applied first and followed by K2, with effective clot formation observed at waiting times of 3, 5, and 10 s. Stone fragment size did not affect clot formation. The most reliable clot suitable for basket extraction was obtained using intrafragment application of the alginate component followed by calcium binder delivery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42698032What 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.