ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2005
[Value of imaging for lymph node metastases from renal cell, bladder, prostate, penile, and testicular cancers].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Impact of nuclear medicine imaging techniques for lymph node surgery].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2009Review
- [Relevance of radiological imaging for lymph node surgery of urological tumors].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computed tomography (CT) imaging is the standard method for the assessment of lymph node metastases in renal cell and testicular cancer. In bladder cancer and prostate cancer the results of CT are not convincing due to a large number of false-negative findings and the prognostic relevance of undetected metastases. For both entities recent studies revealed that MR lymphography using iron oxide particles allows the detection of small metastatic lymph nodes. For penile cancer reliable results for imaging of lymph node metastases do not exist. PET imaging using [(18)F]-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) is the modality of choice in therapy control of seminomas but has no defined value in other urological malignancies. PET with [(11)C] choline and [(11)C] acetate offers great potential in staging and restaging of prostate cancer. Further investigations are necessary to determine the role of these new methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.