ArticleUrolithiasis2025
Does the use of a ureteral access sheath improve perioperative outcomes in ureteroscopy? A real-world multi-institutional study.
Article in Urolithiasis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The evolution of retrograde intrarenal surgery: a comprehensive meta-analysis of suction-assisted versus conventional techniques against mini-PCNL for 2-3 cm renal stones.International urology and nephrology · 2026Pooled it
- Selective Omission of Ureteral Access Sheath in Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery: Surgical and Safety Outcomes from a Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is commonly performed with a ureteral access sheath (UAS). Our objective was to evaluate the impact of UAS use in patients undergoing RIRS for renal stones. We conducted a retrospective, multicenter cohort study of all patients who underwent RIRS for kidney stones between January 2017 and December 2018 at six academic medical centers. Patients were stratified according to UAS use. To adjust for baseline differences, we applied inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW), a propensity score-based method that balances covariates between groups. A total of 1,177 patients were included: 740 (62.8%) underwent RIRS with a UAS and 437 (37.2%) without. After adjustment, adequate balance was achieved between groups. In IPTW analysis, the stone-free rate (SFR) at three months was comparable between groups (OR = 0.75; 95% CI [0.53-1.08]; p = 0.12). UAS use was associated with longer operative time (estimate = 3.71 min; 95% CI [1.08-7.32]; p = 0.04), lower probability of outpatient procedure (OR = 0.67; 95% CI [0.49-0.91]; p = 0.01), and higher likelihood of postoperative stenting (OR = 3.61; 95% CI [2.72-4.78]; p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in overall complications (OR = 1.16; 95% CI [0.68-1.99]; p = 0.57) or major complications (OR = 1.07; 95% CI [0.45-2.57]; p = 0.86). In this large multicenter retrospective study, UAS use during RIRS was associated with a similar stone-free rate but increased perioperative morbidity. These real-world findings suggest that routine UAS use may not always be necessary, although randomized controlled trials are required to define its role more definitively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41021049What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.