MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972677108 · doi:10.1089/end.2019.0520

Preoperative Alpha-Blockers for Ureteroscopy for Ureteral Stones: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

2019· review· en· W2972677108 on OpenAlexaff
Bader Alsaikhan, Alex Koziarz, Jason Y. Lee, Kenneth T. Pace

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Endourology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineUreteroscopyConfidence intervalRelative riskRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisSurgeryInternal medicineUreter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Preoperative alpha-blockers have been proposed to improve intraoperative outcomes and patient stone-free status after ureteroscopy for ureteral stones. Materials and Methods: We searched six databases, including Medline, Embase, and Web of Science, for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating alpha-blocker use before planned ureteroscopy for the management of ureteral calculi. Meta-analysis was performed using DerSimonian and Laird method with inverse variance weighting. Quality of evidence was summarized using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Results: Of 3338 records, 26 were screened as full text and 12 RCTs were included totaling 1352 patients. Meta-analysis demonstrated a 61% risk reduction in need for intraoperative ureteral dilatation in patients administered preoperative alpha-blockers (relative risk [RR]: 0.39 [95% confidence interval, CI: 0.31–0.48], p < 0.00001), as well as increased stone-free status for patients at 4 weeks postoperatively (RR: 1.17 [95% CI: 1.08–1.26], p < 0.0001), and at final follow-up (RR: 1.18 [95% CI: 1.11–1.24], p < 0.00001; median final follow-up 4 weeks [range: 2–8 weeks]). Urologists were more likely to reach the stone with the ureteroscope in patients administered alpha-blockers (RR: 1.16 [95% CI: 1.10–1.23], p < 0.00001). A statistically significant reduction in operative time (mean difference [MD]: −6.05 [95% CI: −10.17 to −1.93] minutes, p = 0.004) and length of hospital stay (weighted MD: −0.34 [95% CI: −0.55 to −0.13] days, p = 0.001) was also demonstrated. Main reported side effects of treatments were abnormal ejaculation, postural hypotension, and dizziness. Outcomes were robust to sensitivity analyses. Results were rated moderate quality evidence using the GRADE framework. Conclusions: Among patients scheduled for semirigid ureteroscopy of ureteral stones, use of preoperative alpha-blockers demonstrated a significant reduction in the need for ureteral orifice dilation and an increase in patient stone-free status at follow-up, and facilitates higher rate of ureteroscopic access to stones, although reducing operative time. An adequately powered trial is needed to definitively address the safety and efficacy of preoperative alpha-blockers for ureteroscopy of ureteral stones.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0210.034
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.192
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EndourologySame topicKidney Stones and Urolithiasis TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207