Quhal F. et al., 2022: Paediatric stone management: innovations and standards.
Quhal F, Al Faddagh A, Silay MS, Straub M, Seitz C.
Department of Urology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Department of Urology, King Fahad Specialist Hospital, Dammam, Saudi Arabia.
Department of Urology, Istanbul Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Department of Urology, Technical University Munich, Munich, Germany.
European Section of Urolithiasis (EULIS), European Association of Urology, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Purpose of review: The aim of this study was to discuss current trends and recent developments in the surgical management of paediatric urolithiasis.
Recent findings: Medical expulsive therapy (MET) is considered as an option for the treatment of children with ureter stones. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (SWL) remains as a first option for majority of kidney stones and upper ureter stones. Advances in endourology have led to increased adoption of retrograde intrarenal surgeries (RIRS) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL/mini-PCNL/ultra-mini-PCNL/micro-PCNL).
Summary: Management of paediatric stone disease has developed significantly in the past decade. However, the evidence in the literature remains disproportional to these advances. Well designed multicentric studies are still needed to compare effectiveness and safety of these procedures.
Curr Opin Urol. 2022 Jun 9. doi: 10.1097/MOU.0000000000001004. Online ahead of print. PMID: 35674672
I confess that I stop reading a publication when I find a major flaw in the first paragraphs. Here in the third sentence the authors state “ … despite the increasing incidence and the high recurrence rates, the amount and the evidence on literature comparing the effectiveness of different interventions for paediatric stone disease are scarce (4).” They refer to an 18 year old paper (1) dealing with the quality of RCTs in Nephrology where paediatric stone disease is not mentioned nor is urology a topic.
I read a little bit more of the present publication to find that “For the scope of the review, only articles published within the past decade were included” This applies to ¾ of the 44 references.
How can I trust the quality of what is written and why should I spend time to find out if authors are careful with what they state.
1 Strippoli GF, Craig JC, Schena FP. The number, quality, and coverage of randomized controlled trials in nephrology. J Am Soc Nephrol. 2004 Feb;15(2):411-9. doi: 10.1097/01.asn.0000100125.21491.46