2019
DOI: 10.1016/s1569-9056(19)33145-8
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

‘Negative ureteroscopy’ for stone disease: Evidence from a systematic review

Abstract: Purpose of Review While ureteroscopy (URS) is a common procedure for ureteric stones, this window between diagnosis and treatment leaves the possibility for a 'negative', 'stoneless' or 'diagnostic' URS. We perform a systematic review to look at the rate of 'negative ureteroscopy' and risk factors associated with it. Recent Findings From a total of 3599 articles and 68 abstracts, 4 studies (1336 patients) were selected. The negative URS rate varied from 4 to 14%. Common predictors seem to be female gender, sma… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 18 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…If no stone was identified at the time of initial URS, this was termed a ‘negative’ URS and indicates spontaneous passage between the time of diagnosis and treatment. 22 A patient was considered to have had a new stone episode if imaging had confirmed stone-free status (SFS) and at least 6 months had passed. Performed in the setting of a university teaching hospital, surgeries were performed by faculty endourologists ( n = 2), attendings ( n = 3) or residents ( n = 5) under their direct supervision.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If no stone was identified at the time of initial URS, this was termed a ‘negative’ URS and indicates spontaneous passage between the time of diagnosis and treatment. 22 A patient was considered to have had a new stone episode if imaging had confirmed stone-free status (SFS) and at least 6 months had passed. Performed in the setting of a university teaching hospital, surgeries were performed by faculty endourologists ( n = 2), attendings ( n = 3) or residents ( n = 5) under their direct supervision.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%