Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25708579›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Urology2015

Risk-adapted strategy for the kidney-sparing management of upper tract tumours.

Thomas Seisen, Pierre Colin, Morgan Rouprêt

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
8.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. A systematic review and meta-analysis of oncological and renal function outcomes obtained after segmental ureterectomy versus radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. [Urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Thomas SeisenAcademic Department of Urology, Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpétrière, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, Paris, F-75013, France.
Pierre ColinDepartment of Urology, Hôpital Privé de La Louvière, Générale de Santé, 69 rue de la Louvière, Lille, F-59042, France.
Morgan RouprêtAcademic Department of Urology, Hôpital de la Pitié-Salpétrière, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, 47-83 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, Paris, F-75013, France.
Générale de Santé · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The conservative management of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) was traditionally restricted to patients with imperative indications only. However, current recommendations suggest selected patients with normal, functioning contralateral kidneys should also be considered for such an approach. A risk-adapted strategy to accurately select patients who could benefit from kidney-sparing surgery without compromising their oncological safety has been advocated. A number of kidney-sparing surgical procedures are available. Despite the advent of ureteroscopic management, segmental ureterectomy and the percutaneous approach both have specific indications for use that predominantly depend on the tumour location and progression risk. These kidney-sparing procedures are cost-effective, and when used to treat patients with low-risk UTUC, are associated with oncological outcomes similar to radical nephroureterectomy. Systematic second-look endoscopy combined with upper tract instillations of topical chemotherapeutic agents after ureteroscopic or percutaneous surgery and a single early intravesical instillation of mitomycin C after any kidney-sparing procedure might decrease the risks of local recurrence and progression. Meticulous and stringent endoscopic monitoring of the upper and lower urinary tract is a key component of the conservative management of UTUC. Local recurrences are often suitable for repeat conservative therapy, whereas disease progression should be treated with delayed radical nephroureterectomy.

Indexed as

Organ Sparing TreatmentsAdministration, IntravesicalAlgorithmsAntibiotics, AntineoplasticCarcinoma, Transitional CellDisease ProgressionHumansMitomycinUreterUreteroscopyUrologic NeoplasmsAntibiotics, AntineoplasticMitomycin

Identifiers

PMID25708579
OpenAlexW2092025407

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.