ArticleCurrent urology2013
Significance of ureteroscopic biopsy grade in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma.
Article in Current urology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- [Biopsy techniques in the upper urinary tract for the diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma: systematic review].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2019Pooled it
- Advances in the management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma: improved endoscopic management through better diagnostics.Therapeutic advances in urology · 2018Review
- Intrarenal urothelial cancers confused as infiltrative renal masses: Report of 22 cases and literature review.Oncology letters · 2018Article
- Does lymph node dissection during nephroureterectomy affect oncological outcomes in upper tract urothelial carcinoma patients without suspicious lymph node metastasis on preoperative imaging studies?World journal of urology · 2017Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe objective of this study was to assess the significance of the ureteroscopic biopsy grade for patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). PATIENTS AND
methodsThis study included 40 patients who were diagnosed with a single focus of UTUC by ureteroscopic biopsy and subsequently underwent nephroureterectomy. The significance of the biopsy grade as a predictive factor for pathological outcomes of nephroureterectomy was retrospectively analyzed.
resultsOf these 40 patients, 19 (47.5%) and 21 (52.5%) were diagnosed with low and high grade UTUC, respectively. The ureteroscopic biopsy grade matched the pathological grade of surgically resected specimens in 35 of the 40 cases (87.5%), and there was a significant correlation between the biopsy and pathological grades (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the biopsy grade was also shown to be closely associated with the pathological stage (p < 0.001); that is, only 1 of the 19 patients (5.3%) with biopsy low grade UTUC were pathologically diagnosed as having muscle invasive disease, while 17 of the 21 patients (81.0%) with biopsy high grade UTUC appeared to show tumor invasion into muscle or deeper.
conclusionsThe grade of UTUC on ureteroscopic biopsy could provide accurate diagnostic information on the final pathology of nephroureterectomy specimens.
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.