ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology2009
Endoscopic treatment of vesicoureteral reflux: current practice and the need for multifactorial assessment.
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bladder Dysfunction and Re-Absorbable Bulking Agent Affect Success Rate in Children Underwent Endoscopic Treatment for Vesicoureteral Reflux: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Macroplastique and Botox are superior to Macroplastique alone in the management of neurogenic vesicoureteric reflux in spinal cord injury population with presumed healthy bladders.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2019Article
- Endoscopic correction of vesicoureteral reflux in children using polyacrylate-polyalcohol copolymer (Vantris): 5-years of prospective follow-up.Central European journal of urology · 2017Article
- Endoscopic correction of complex cases of vesicoureteral reflux utilizing Vantris as a new non-biodegradable tissue-augmenting substance.Pediatric surgery international · 2014Article
- Factors that impact the outcome of endoscopic correction of vesicoureteral reflux: a multivariate analysis.International urology and nephrology · 2013Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) affects around 1% of all children. It carries an increased risk of febrile urinary-tract infections (UTIs) and is associated with impaired renal function. Antibiotic prophylaxis is an established approach to managing the condition, but it does not protect against UTI and encourages bacterial resistance. Ureteral re-implantation (open surgery) is a relatively traumatic procedure typically requiring hospitalization, and there is a risk of significant post-treatment complications. Endoscopic treatment with NASHA/Dx gel (Deflux®) is minimally invasive, well tolerated and provides cure rates approaching those of open surgery: 80-90% in several studies. It has also been shown to be effective in a variety of 'complicated' cases. Thus, endoscopic treatment is generally preferable to open surgery and long-term antibiotic prophylaxis. Non-treatment of VUR is being discussed as an alternative option, although this mainly appears suitable for children with low-grade reflux and normal kidneys. A new approach to managing VUR may be considered, with treatment decisions based not only on the grade of reflux but also on factors such as age, sex, renal scarring and bladder dysfunction. Open surgery would be reserved only for use in the 10-15% of children not responding to endoscopic treatment and those with severe ureteral anomalies.
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.