ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences2026
Comparison of outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the management of renal calculi measuring one to two centimeters.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To compare outcomes of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) and retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) for renal stones measuring 1-2 cm, including stone clearance, hospital stay, hematuria, sepsis, postoperative pain, and retreatment. Methodology: Six months, single-center, open-label, parallel-group randomized controlled trial was conducted at the Department of Urology, Dr. Ziauddin Hospital, North Nazimabad, Karachi, from September 5, 2025 to March 4, 2026. Ninety-eight eligible adults were enrolled consecutively and randomized 1:1 to ESWL or RIRS by lottery method using concealed identical allocation slips. Non-contrast CT-KUB was performed at baseline and at 28 days. Pain was assessed by VAS at 24 hours. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 26, with p<0.05 considered significant. Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between the treatment groups. Stone-free status after one session was 53.1% with ESWL and 85.7% with RIRS (RR 1.62, 95% CI 1.21 to 2.15; p<0.001), while 28-day stone clearance was 67.3% and 85.7%, respectively (RR 1.27, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.60; p=0.032). ESWL was associated with shorter hospital stay (p<0.001). Median VAS pain score at 24 hours was higher after ESWL [4 (IQR 3-4)] than RIRS [3 (IQR 2-4); p<0.001]. Retreatment was more frequent after ESWL (30.6% vs 10.2%; RR for RIRS vs ESWL 0.33, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.85; p=0.012), while gross hematuria and postoperative sepsis were comparable. Conclusion: RIRS provided higher clearance and lower retreatment and pain scores than ESWL, while ESWL was associated with shorter hospital stay.
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.