ArticleCurrent urology reports2012
Bladder augmentation and urinary diversion for neurogenic LUTS: current indications.
Article in Current urology reports, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- An Acellular Platform to Drive Urinary Bladder Tissue Regeneration.Advanced therapeutics · 2025Article
- Canadian Urological Association guideline: Diagnosis, management, and surveillance of neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction - Full text.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2019Article
- The evaluation and management of refractory neurogenic overactive bladder.Current urology reports · 2014Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Augmentation cystoplasty and urinary diversion are no longer commonplace in the management of patients with neurogenic bladder, but remain an important surgical treatment for those with refractory LUTS who have failed neuromodulation and onabotulinum toxin treatment or who are not candidates for those treatments. Augmentation is an option in patients who can perform intermittent catheterization and is usually performed with ileum or large intestine. Some patients benefit from continent cutaneous catherizable channels. Supravesical urinary diversion may be necessary in more severe cases. Ileovesicostomies are being supplanted by indwelling suprapubic catheters, and when catheters fail conduits may be a better option. When feasible, the diverted bladder should be excised to avoid pyocystis.
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.