Question · asked by 1 review
Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy vs tubeless mini‐percutaneous nephrolithotripsy: Serious adverse events or complications of treatment — not reported
- Population
- Not specified
- Intervention
- Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy
- Comparison
- tubeless mini‐percutaneous nephrolithotripsy
- Outcome
- Serious adverse events or complications of treatment — not reported
The review found no eligible studies for this question.
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Percutaneous nephrolithotripsy vs tubeless mini‐percutaneous nephrolithotripsy Serious adverse events or complications of treatment — not reported The review found no eligible studies for this question. Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of urinary stones in children (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | no estimate extracted | Not reported | No studies found |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Medical and surgical interventions for the treatment of urinary stones in children 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | Not extracted | Not assessed |
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.