Spontaneous Stone Passage Rates of Ureteric Stones After Stenting for Acute Renal Colic: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Renal colic poses a significant burden on patients and healthcare systems. Negative ureteroscopy in the setting of stented patients is reported at up to 14%, resulting in unnecessary surgeries and inefficiencies. While ureteral stents have demonstrated efficacy in relieving obstruction, their exact effect on spontaneous stone passage (SSP) is unclear. Hence, a systematic evaluation of the literature was performed to identify the impact of ureteral stents on spontaneous stone passage rates. Methods: A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed (January 1989–February 2025) to identify studies investigating indwelling ureteric stents and SSP. Two independent reviewers screened the abstracts and full texts, with a third resolving conflicts. Quality assessment was conducted using The Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies—of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB-2) tools. Results: A total of 2437 patients in 14 studies investigating SSP in stented patients were included. One included study was a randomised controlled trial, but the rest were observational (n = 13). Three studies compared stented and control groups, whereas 11 studies only investigated patients with stents. Mean/median overall stone sizes ranged from 4.7 to 7.8 mm in diameter. Overall, SSP rates with stents varied significantly, ranging from 1.7 to 42.3%, in the setting of variable stone size, location, duration of follow-up, and method of stone passage detection. When comparing stented and non-stented patients, two studies demonstrated impaired SSP rates in stented patients (13.9% vs. 26.8% and 14% vs. 20%), but only one of these differences was statistically significant. Three studies comparing patients with retrograde ureteral stents and nephrostomies found increased SSP rates in nephrostomy cohorts (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Stone passage rates with stents vary widely due to heterogeneity in study design, patient characteristics, and follow-up. Some studies suggest that stents may impair passage; however, evidence remains inconclusive due to the limited availability of high-quality comparative data. This study underscores the need for larger prospective trials to clarify the actual impact of stenting on stone passage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.055 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".