ReviewWorld journal of urology2017
Lymph node dissection in bladder cancer: Where do we stand?
Review in World journal of urology, 2017. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A preliminary investigation of precise visualization, localization, and resection of pelvic lymph nodes in bladder cancer by using indocyanine green fluorescence-guided approach through intracutaneous dye injection into the lower limbs and perineum.Frontiers in oncology · 2024Article
- Long non-coding RNA LINC00336 as an independent prognostic indicator and an oncogenic lncRNA in bladder cancer.Archives of medical science : AMS · 2023Article
- Risks and benefits of pelvic lymphadenectomy in octogenarians undergoing radical cystectomy due to urothelial carcinoma of the bladder.International urology and nephrology · 2017Article
- Lymph node dissection in urological cancers: one topic, many controversies.World journal of urology · 2017Article
- Editorial concerning "Pelvic lymph node dissection may be limited on the contralateral side in strictly unilateral bladder cancer without compromising oncological radicality".Bladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2016Article
- Advances in surgical management of muscle invasive bladder cancer.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaReview
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
Radical cystectomy with lymphadenectomy remains the standard-of-care treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer. Lymphadenectomy is a central component of the operation because it continues to play both diagnostic and therapeutic roles. Routinely available preoperative imaging has limited diagnostic accuracy as it relies mostly on size to identify nodal metastasis increasing the value of lymphadenectomy. While the merits of lymphadenectomy are not in question, the extent of lymphadenectomy required to provide maximum benefit while limiting morbidity remains controversial. Furthermore, although robotic-assisted surgery has gained popularity in many centers, concern remains regarding the learning curve required and skill needed to replicate the quality of an open lymphadenectomy. Research efforts have been focused on these unresolved issues, and several trials are currently ongoing to help address these knowledge deficit areas. In this update, we will focus on the current state of lymphadenectomy for bladder cancer and highlight recent advances.
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.