SynthesisSao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina2026
Standard versus miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy in pediatric patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough miniaturized percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mini-PCNL) is a less invasive alternative to standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), its comparative outcomes in pediatric patients remain unclear.
objectivesTo compare the efficacy and safety of mini-PCNL versus standard PCNL in children with nephrolithiasis. DESIGN AND
settingSystematic review and meta-analysis conducted according to PRISMA guidelines, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies of pediatric patients undergoing mini-PCNL or standard PCNL.
methodsMajor databases (Cochrane Library, PubMed/MEDLINE, and Embase) were searched through August 2024. The primary endpoint was the stone-free rate. Secondary endpoints included operative time, postoperative fever, and complications classified by the Clavien-Dindo system.
resultsFive studies (two RCTs and three retrospective cohort studies) involving 490 patients (46% underwent mini-PCNL) were included. Stone-free rates were comparable between the groups (relative risk [RR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.929-1.041; p = 0.56; I2 = 0%). Mini-PCNL was associated with longer operative times (mean difference [MD], 7.5 min; 95% CI, 0.2-14.9; p = 0.04; I2 = 78%) but a lower risk of Clavien-Dindo grade I complications (RR 0.464; 95% CI 0.442-0.944; p < 0.05; I2 = 0%). No significant differences were observed in postoperative fever or Clavien-Dindo grade II-IV complications.
conclusionMini-PCNL and standard PCNL achieve comparable stone-free rates in pediatric patients. Mini-PCNL is associated with fewer minor complications, whereas standard PCNL is associated with shorter operative times. Both techniques demonstrate similar safety profiles with respect to major complications. CLINICAL TRIAL OR SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42024618399; available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42024567890.
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.