Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26216155›Full record

ArticlePediatric radiology2015

Pediatric ureteropelvic junction obstruction: can magnetic resonance urography identify crossing vessels?

Kushal R Parikh, Matthew R Hammer, Kate H Kraft, Vesna Ivančić, Ethan A Smith, Jonathan R Dillman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric radiology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Use of MR Urography in Pediatric Patients.Current urology reports · 2018
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Magnetic Resonance Urogram in Pediatric Urology: a Comprehensive Review of Applications and Advances.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kushal R ParikhDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Section of Pediatric Radiology, Mott Children's Hospital, 1540 E. Hospital Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA. pkushal@med.umich.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7394-2715
Matthew R HammerDepartment of Radiology, University of Texas Southwestern, Dallas, TX, USA.
Kate H KraftDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Section of Pediatric Radiology, Mott Children's Hospital, 1540 E. Hospital Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Vesna IvančićDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Section of Pediatric Radiology, Mott Children's Hospital, 1540 E. Hospital Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Ethan A SmithDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Section of Pediatric Radiology, Mott Children's Hospital, 1540 E. Hospital Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Jonathan R DillmanDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan Health System, Section of Pediatric Radiology, Mott Children's Hospital, 1540 E. Hospital Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA.
Michigan Medicine · USThe University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMR Urography (MRU) is an increasingly used imaging modality for the evaluation of pediatric genitourinary obstruction.

objectiveTo determine whether pediatric MR urography (MRU) reliably detects crossing vessels in the setting of suspected ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction. The clinical significance of these vessels was also evaluated. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe identified pediatric patients diagnosed with UPJ obstruction by MRU between May 2009 and June 2014. MRU studies were evaluated by two pediatric radiologists for the presence or absence of crossing vessels. Ancillary imaging findings such as laterality, parenchymal thinning/scarring, trapped fluid in the proximal ureter, and presence of renal parenchymal edema were also evaluated. Imaging findings were compared to surgical findings. We used the Mann-Whitney U test to compare continuous data and the Fisher exact test to compare proportions.

resultsTwenty-four of 25 (96%) UPJ obstructions identified by MRU were surgically confirmed. MRU identified crossing vessels in 10 of these cases, with 9 cases confirmed intraoperatively (κ = 0.92 [95% CI: 0.75, 1.0]). Crossing vessels were determined to be the primary cause of UPJ obstruction in 7/9 children intraoperatively, while in two children the vessels were deemed incidental and noncontributory to the urinary tract obstruction. There was no significant difference in age or the proportions of ancillary findings when comparing children without and with obstructing vessels.

conclusionMRU allows detection of crossing vessels in pediatric UPJ obstruction. Although these vessels are the primary cause of obstruction in some children, they are incidental and non-contributory in others. Our study failed to convincingly identify any significant predictors (e.g., age or presence of renal parenchymal edema) that indicate when a crossing vessel is the primary cause of obstruction.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingAdolescentChildChild, PreschoolContrast MediaFemaleGadoliniumHeterocyclic CompoundsHumansImage EnhancementImaging, Three-DimensionalInfantMaleOrganometallic CompoundsReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesContrast MediaGadoliniumgadoteridolHeterocyclic CompoundsOrganometallic CompoundsChildrenCrossing vesselMagnetic resonance urographyUreteropelvic junction obstruction

Identifiers

PMID26216155
OpenAlexW1437062591

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.