ArticleFrontiers in surgery2026
Clinical risk factors and machine learning-assisted interpretation of ureteral access sheath insertion failure: a multicenter study and meta-analysis.
Article in Frontiers in surgery, 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
Background: In patients undergoing retrograde ureteroscopic lithotripsy, the failure rate of ureteral access sheath insertion is approximately 10%. Temporary double-J stenting with delayed secondary intervention is usually required when insertion fails. However, such cases cannot be reliably identified based on routine preoperative imaging. This study aimed to identify risk factors associated with ureteral access sheath (UAS) insertion failure. Methods: This retrospective multicenter study included patients who underwent retrograde intrarenal surgery for urolithiasis between January 2025 and December 2025 at six urological centers. Multivariable logistic regression was used as the primary analysis to identify factors associated with UAS insertion failure. An XGBoost model was additionally constructed, and SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) were used to visualize the contribution and direction of included predictors. A systematic review and meta-analysis were further performed to synthesize previous evidence regarding relevant risk factors. Results: A total of 792 patients were included, of whom 153 patients experienced UAS insertion failure. Multivariable logistic regression identified stone history length, hydronephrosis, age, and stone-size parameters as factors associated with UAS insertion failure. Stone location, particularly proximal ureteral location, showed a risk-increasing pattern in univariable analysis, SHAP interpretation, and meta-analysis. XGBoost and logistic regression showed comparable discrimination in the test cohort, with AUCs of 0.724 and 0.692, respectively. SHAP analysis provided complementary feature-level visualization of predictor contribution and direction. The meta-analysis further supported the association between proximal ureteral location and UAS insertion failure, while the effects of stone history and sex were less consistent. Conclusions: UAS insertion failure was associated with hydronephrosis, stone-size parameters, and stone history length, with age requiring cautious interpretation. Proximal ureteral stone location may provide additional clinical information when interpreted together with other stone-related factors. SHAP-based visualization and meta-analysis offered complementary evidence to the regression-based findings. These results may support individualized preoperative assessment before attempted placement of a planned 11/13F UAS.
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.