ArticleDer Urologe. Ausg. A2008
[Photodynamic diagnostics in the urinary tract. Consensus paper of the Working Group for Oncology of the German Society for Urology].
Article in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of continuous saline bladder irrigation compared with intravesical chemotherapy after transurethral resection of bladder tumors.World journal of urology · 2019Pooled it
- Review of current optical diagnostic techniques for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.Central European journal of urology · 2016Review
- [Photodynamic diagnostics of the bladder: current study results].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2013Review
- [Endourological imaging with narrow band imaging].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2012Article
- [Diagnostic procedure for bladder cancer. Standards and current developments].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Because of the frequency of occurrence and the long protracted course, bladder carcinoma is the most expensive solid tumor in terms of costs, from diagnosis to death of the patient. The most important cost factor within the total cost is the treatment of recurrent, non-muscle invasive bladder carcinoma. Photodynamic diagnosis (PDD) improves the early detection rate of non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, especially the detection of carcinoma in situ and severe dysplasia. PDD also reduces the number of residual tumors after TUR-B compared to white-light guided TUR-B and also the early recurrence rate although long-term outcome with hexylaminolaevulinic acid with regards to the general course of bladder cancer is still lacking. PDD has been used mainly for detection of bladder cancer and specifically carcinoma in situ in conjunction with diagnostic and therapeutic transurethral resection of the bladder. In 2006 hexylaminolaevulinic acid (HAL) was approved in the EU (EMEA) as a photosensitizer for the use in photodynamic diagnosis of the bladder. Several guidelines have incorporated PDD as optional form of diagnosis during endoscopy in proven or suspected bladder cancer, but no specific recommendations regarding indication and application of PDD exist. The German group of urologic oncology (AKO) invited urologists and biologists involved in the development of hexylaminolaevulinic acid as well its clinical use to participate in evaluating the data for HAL and its predecessor delta-aminolaevulinic acid (5-ALA). A consensus with regards to the indications, contraindications, technique, pre-clinical data, comparison of HAL and 5-ALA, current results, costs and follow-up was reached and are presented in this paper.
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.