{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"submitter":["McClinton S"],"funding":["Chief Scientist Office","National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)","National Institute for Healthcare Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (NIHR HTA)","National Institute for Healthcare Research Health Technology Assessment Programme"],"pagination":["286"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC5964896"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["19(1)"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Background</h4>Urinary stone disease is very common with an estimated prevalence among the general population of 2-3%. Ureteric stones are associated with severe pain as they pass through the urinary tract and have significant impact on patients' quality of life due to the detrimental effect on their ability to work and need for hospitalisation. Most ureteric stones can be expected to pass spontaneously with supportive care. However, between one-fifth and one-third of cases require an intervention. The two standard active intervention options are extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic stone retrieval. ESWL and ureteroscopy are effective in terms of stone clearance; however, they differ in terms of invasiveness, anaesthetic requirement, treatment setting, complica"],"journal":["Trials"],"pubmed_title":["TISU: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, as first treatment option, compared with direct progression to ureteroscopic treatment, for ureteric stones: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial."],"pmcid":["PMC5964896"],"funding_grant_id":["HERU1","10/137/01","HSRU1"],"pubmed_authors":["Anson K","Starr K","MacLennan G","Norrie J","Pickard R","Clark CT","McClinton S","Lam T","Keeley F","Thomas R","Kilonzo M","Burgess N","Cameron S","N'Dow J","MacLennan S","McDonald A","TISU Study Group"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"TISU: Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy, as first treatment option, compared with direct progression to ureteroscopic treatment, for ureteric stones: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.","description":"<h4>Background</h4>Urinary stone disease is very common with an estimated prevalence among the general population of 2-3%. Ureteric stones are associated with severe pain as they pass through the urinary tract and have significant impact on patients' quality of life due to the detrimental effect on their ability to work and need for hospitalisation. Most ureteric stones can be expected to pass spontaneously with supportive care. However, between one-fifth and one-third of cases require an intervention. The two standard active intervention options are extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) and ureteroscopic stone retrieval. ESWL and ureteroscopy are effective in terms of stone clearance; however, they differ in terms of invasiveness, anaesthetic requirement, treatment setting, complica","dates":{"release":"2018-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2018 May","modification":"2025-04-05T10:58:36.019Z","creation":"2019-03-26T23:38:34Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC5964896","cross_references":{"pubmed":["29788982"],"doi":["10.1186/s13063-018-2652-1"]}}