Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery: Secondary interventions
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy may leads to lower need for secondary interventions Assumed MCID: 5% compared with retrograde intrarenal surgery (low certainty).
What each review found
Current versions only| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Percutaneous nephrolithotomy vs retrograde intrarenal surgery Need for secondary interventions Assumed MCID: 5% · adults with renal stones Percutaneous nephrolithotomy may leads to lower need for secondary interventions Assumed MCID: 5% compared with retrograde intrarenal surgery (low certainty). Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults (2023) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | RR 0.31 [0.17, 0.55] | 21 studies · 2005 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment of renal stones in adults 2023 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
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.