Ureteroscopy vs Shockwave Lithotripsy to Remove Kidney Stones in Children and Adolescents
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Most children and adolescents with kidney and ureteral stones are treated with ureteroscopy, despite the uncertainty and equal weight of guideline recommendations for ureteroscopy or shockwave lithotripsy. Objective: To compare stone clearance and patient-reported outcomes among children and adolescents after ureteroscopy or shockwave lithotripsy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This nonrandomized clinical trial enrolled patients between March 16, 2020, and July 31, 2023, at 31 medical centers in the US and Canada. Patients aged 8 to 21 years with kidney stones, ureteral stones, or both were included. Follow-up was completed on October 15, 2023. Interventions: Ureteroscopy or shockwave lithotripsy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was stone clearance assessed by standardized ultrasonography 6 (±2) weeks after surgery. Using inverse probability weighting and random intercepts for site, stone clearance was evaluated per kidney or ureter using logistic regression and estimated stone clearance rates were generated for each procedure. Results: This study included 1142 patients (690 females [60.4%]), with a median age of 15.6 years (IQR, 12.6-17.3 years). In terms of race and ethnicity, 41 patients (3.6%) were Black, 130 (11.4%) were Hispanic, and 884 (77.4%) were White. A total of 124 urologists treated 1069 and 197 kidneys or ureters with ureteroscopy and shockwave lithotripsy (n = 953 and n = 189 patients), respectively, with a median stone size of 6.0 mm (IQR, 4.0-9.0 mm). Ureteral stents were placed at time of index surgery for 841 procedures for 767 patients (80.4%) receiving ureteroscopy and for 6 procedures for 5 patients (2.6%) receiving shockwave lithotripsy. Stone clearance occurred in 474 patients who underwent ureteroscopy (71.2% [95% CI, 63.8%-78.5%]) and in 105 patients who underwent shockwave lithotripsy (67.5% [95% CI, 61.0%-74.1%]), a difference that was not statistically significant (risk difference, 3.6% [95% CI, -6.2% to 13.5%]). Compared with shockwave lithotripsy, ureteroscopy resulted in greater pain interference (T-score difference, 5.0 [95% CI, 2.3-7.8]) and urinary symptoms (symptom score difference, 3.9 [95% CI, 1.2-6.7]) 1 week after surgery. Patients who had ureteroscopy missed more school (risk difference, 21.3% [95% CI, 9.7%-32.8%]) and caregivers missed more work (risk difference, 23.0% [95% CI, 11.0%-35.0%]) in the week after surgery. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of 1142 children and adolescents with kidney and ureteral stones, there was no clinically meaningful difference in stone clearance with ureteroscopy vs shockwave lithotripsy. Shockwave lithotripsy was associated with better patient-reported outcomes. These findings raise questions about the preference for ureteroscopy in practice. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04285658.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».