ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
Institutional billed-charge patterns and resource utilization in flexible navigable aspiration sheath-assisted and no-access-sheath ureteroscopy: a single-center descriptive cohort study.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 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
purposeTo describe institutional billed-charge patterns and resource utilization in flexible navigable aspiration sheath (FANS)-assisted ureteroscopy and ureteroscopy performed without a ureteral access sheath (NoUAS), recognizing that the two pathways were used in clinically different populations.
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated 88 ureteroscopy cases performed by a single endourologist from September 2024 through August 2025. Preoperative stone volume was manually derived from computed tomography measurements using an ellipsoid approximation. Continuous variables are reported as median (interquartile range [IQR]) and compared with Wilcoxon rank-sum tests; categorical variables used Fisher exact tests. Because case mix and site of service were markedly imbalanced and numeric operative-time data were incomplete for outpatient cases, comparisons were treated as descriptive rather than as estimates of an independent device effect.
resultsThirty-six cases used FANS and 52 used NoUAS. FANS cases had greater median stone volume (553 [IQR 257-1,141] vs 208 [115-463] mm
conclusionFANS cases occurred within a more complex, higher-charge care pathway, but the observed differences cannot be attributed to the device itself. These data provide an institutional benchmark for future analyses using clinically comparable cohorts, standardized outcomes, and actual cost data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42881348What 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.