Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42471481›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2026

Comprehensive survey on urological stent practices by the European Association of Urology (EAU) Endourology.

Burak Akgul, Selcuk Guven, Gernot Ortner, Hakan Akdere, Bhaskar Somani, Vineet Gauhar, Steffi Kar Kei Yuen, Panagiotis Kallidonis, Thomas Rw Herrmann, Udo Nagele and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Burak AkgulDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis, IN, USA. burakgul@iu.edu.
Selcuk GuvenDepartment of Urology, Meram School of Medicine, Necmettin Erbakan University, Konya, Turkey.
Gernot OrtnerDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Hall in Tirol, General Hospital Hall I.T., Hall in Tirol, Austria.
Hakan AkdereDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Trakya University, Edirne, Turkey.
Bhaskar SomaniDepartment of Urology, University Hospital, Southampton NHS Trust, Southampton, UK.
Vineet GauharDepartment of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Steffi Kar Kei YuenDepartment of Surgery, S.H. Ho Urology Centre, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
Panagiotis KallidonisDepartment of Urology, University of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Thomas Rw HerrmannDepartment of Urology, Kantonspital Frauenfeld, Spital Thurgau AG, Frauenfeld, Switzerland.
Udo NageleDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Hall in Tirol, General Hospital Hall I.T., Hall in Tirol, Austria.
Theodoros TokasTraining and Research in Urological Surgery and Technology (T.R.U.S.T.)-Group, Hall in Tirol, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeUreteral stents are widely used following ureteroscopy (URS), yet several aspects of their management remain non-standardized despite contemporary EAU and AUA guideline recommendations. This study evaluated contemporary international practices and identified gaps in ureteral stent use among endourologists.

methodsA cross-sectional international survey consisting of 58 items across nine domains was distributed via social media, major urological meetings, and the EAU Endourology Section. Only fully completed responses were analyzed. Descriptive statistics were used, with continuous variables reported as medians and categorical variables as frequencies and percentages.

resultsA total of 121 respondents from 48 countries were included. Stent placement remained common after uncomplicated ureteroscopy and was nearly universal in complicated cases. Pre-stenting was applied selectively, most commonly after failed ureteroscopy and for ureteral dilatation. A 6 Fr stent and polyurethane material were the preferred choices. Stent-related symptoms were frequent, with urgency and frequency predominating, followed by hematuria. Pharmacologic management varied, and conservative treatment was commonly used for post-stenting infections. Notably, 45% of respondents did not use a structured stent-tracking system and 71.8% had never used a validated symptom-assessment tool such as the USSQ. Exploratory subgroup analyses identified differences according to geographic region, institution type, and endourological training background in selected aspects of stent management, including pre-stenting duration, long-term stent exchange protocols, pharmacologic management, and follow-up systems.

conclusionInternational ureteral stent practices show substantial variability. Although core practices were broadly comparable across regions, important gaps remain in stent tracking and symptom assessment, highlighting opportunities to improve patient safety and standardize care.

Indexed as

Practice Patterns, Physicians'StentsUreterUreteroscopyUrologyCross-Sectional StudiesEuropeHumansSocieties, MedicalEndourologyPractice variabilityStent-related symptomsUreteral stent

Identifiers

PMID42471481
PMCPMC13380575

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.