PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 19, 2026Urologia Journal0 citations

Evaluating the reimbursement and cost-effectiveness of ureteroscopy for treating ureteral calculi: Pre-stented versus non-stented primary procedures

View Full Paper
RSReut ShasharNFNicola FazaaLBLihi Blumen

Key Points

  • This research aims to compare the cost-effectiveness and reimbursement of ureteroscopy techniques for treating ureteral stones.
  • Comparison of primary ureteroscopy (URS) with pre-stented URS
  • Assessment of clinical outcomes and economic factors
  • Analysis based on reimbursed expenditures
  • Primary URS shows comparable clinical outcomes to pre-stented procedures
  • Primary URS is more cost-effective for distal ureter stones
  • Findings highlight the importance of economic considerations in treatment selection

Abstract

Primary URS and pre-stented URS yield comparable clinical outcomes. However, primary URS is more cost-effective for distal ureter stones, emphasizing the importance of economic considerations in treatment selection. These findings reflect reimbursed expenditures and not a formal cost-utility analysis.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Shashar et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69e4741c010ef96374d8fd70https://doi.org/10.1177/03915603261439613
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper