Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Clinical Kidney Journal, sfx151, https://doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfx151 The online version has been updated to correct an error in Table 1. Table 1. Patient characteristics of all patients and the propensity score-matched cohort . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age, years (±SD) 49 (15.0) 51 (14.4) 0.124 50 (15.0) 51 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI, kg/m2 (±SD) 27 (4.75) 27 (4.64) 0.596 27 (4.4) 27 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones (%) <0.001 0.722 1 49 51 57 58 2 15 25 26 22 3 7 13 11 11 >3 4 11 5 9 Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age, years (±SD) 49 (15.0) 51 (14.4) 0.124 50 (15.0) 51 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI, kg/m2 (±SD) 27 (4.75) 27 (4.64) 0.596 27 (4.4) 27 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones (%) <0.001 0.722 1 49 51 57 58 2 15 25 26 22 3 7 13 11 11 >3 4 11 5 9 Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) Bold P-values indicate statistical significance. Open in new tab Table 1. Patient characteristics of all patients and the propensity score-matched cohort . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age, years (±SD) 49 (15.0) 51 (14.4) 0.124 50 (15.0) 51 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI, kg/m2 (±SD) 27 (4.75) 27 (4.64) 0.596 27 (4.4) 27 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones (%) <0.001 0.722 1 49 51 57 58 2 15 25 26 22 3 7 13 11 11 >3 4 11 5 9 Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age, years (±SD) 49 (15.0) 51 (14.4) 0.124 50 (15.0) 51 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI, kg/m2 (±SD) 27 (4.75) 27 (4.64) 0.596 27 (4.4) 27 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones (%) <0.001 0.722 1 49 51 57 58 2 15 25 26 22 3 7 13 11 11 >3 4 11 5 9 Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) Bold P-values indicate statistical significance. Open in new tab has been changed to Table 1. Patient characteristics of all patients and the propensity score-matched cohort . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age (±SD) 49.4 (15.0) 50.9 (14.4) 0.124 50.1 (15.0) 50.7 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI (±SD) 26.74 (4.75) 26.56 (4.64) 0.596 26.6 (4.4) 26.7 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, in mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones 1 stone 74.8% 50.7% <0.001 57.0% 57.6% 0.722 2 stones 15.1% 25.3% 26.3% 22.2% 3 stones 6.6% 13.3% 11.3% 11.1% >3 stones 3.5% 10.7% 5.4% 9.1% Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age (±SD) 49.4 (15.0) 50.9 (14.4) 0.124 50.1 (15.0) 50.7 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI (±SD) 26.74 (4.75) 26.56 (4.64) 0.596 26.6 (4.4) 26.7 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, in mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones 1 stone 74.8% 50.7% <0.001 57.0% 57.6% 0.722 2 stones 15.1% 25.3% 26.3% 22.2% 3 stones 6.6% 13.3% 11.3% 11.1% >3 stones 3.5% 10.7% 5.4% 9.1% Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) Bold P-values indicate statistical significance. Open in new tab Table 1. Patient characteristics of all patients and the propensity score-matched cohort . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age (±SD) 49.4 (15.0) 50.9 (14.4) 0.124 50.1 (15.0) 50.7 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI (±SD) 26.74 (4.75) 26.56 (4.64) 0.596 26.6 (4.4) 26.7 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, in mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones 1 stone 74.8% 50.7% <0.001 57.0% 57.6% 0.722 2 stones 15.1% 25.3% 26.3% 22.2% 3 stones 6.6% 13.3% 11.3% 11.1% >3 stones 3.5% 10.7% 5.4% 9.1% Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) . All (n = 1282) . . Propensity score 2:1 matched (n = 735) . . . ESWL . URS . P-value . ESWL . URS . P-value . Number of patients (%) 999 (78) 283 (22) 490 (67) 245 (33) Age (±SD) 49.4 (15.0) 50.9 (14.4) 0.124 50.1 (15.0) 50.7 (14.2) 0.685 Female (%) 274 (27.4) 74 (26.1) 0.669 126 (25.7) 71 (29.0) 0.346 Male (%) 725 (72.6) 209 (73.9) 364 (74.3) 174 (71.0) BMI (±SD) 26.74 (4.75) 26.56 (4.64) 0.596 26.6 (4.4) 26.7 (4.9) 0.790 Size of biggest stone, in mm (IQR) 9 (7–11) 8 (6–11) <0.001 8 (6–10) 8 (6–12) 0.988 Number of stones 1 stone 74.8% 50.7% <0.001 57.0% 57.6% 0.722 2 stones 15.1% 25.3% 26.3% 22.2% 3 stones 6.6% 13.3% 11.3% 11.1% >3 stones 3.5% 10.7% 5.4% 9.1% Complications (%) Clavien II 24 (2.4) 20 (7.1) <0.001 17 (3.5) 17 (6.9) <0.001 Clavien IIIa 8 (0.8) 0 (0) 0.21 3 (0.6) 0 (0) Clavien IIIb 5 (0.5) 1 (0.4) 0.30 3 (0.6) 1 (0.4) Clavien IV 0 0 0 (0) 0 (0) Bold P-values indicate statistical significance. Open in new tab © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected] © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA.
Clinical Kidney Journal – Oxford University Press
Published: Apr 1, 2019
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.