ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2017
Cryosurgery, an alternative treatment option for organ-confined prostate cancer: current beliefs and practice patterns of urologists.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2017. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cryoablation reshapes the immune microenvironment in the distal tumor and enhances the anti-tumor immunity.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Article
- Magnetic resonance imaging of the prostate after focal therapy with high-intensity focused ultrasound.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2020Review
- 3-T multiparametric MRI characteristics of prostate cancer patients suspicious for biochemical recurrence after primary focal cryosurgery (hemiablation).International urology and nephrology · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aim to evaluate the current beliefs and practice patterns of urologists in regard to use of cryosurgery for management of PCa.
methodsAn anonymous 13-point survey was designed and sent out to members of the Society of Urologic Oncology (SUO), Endourological Society (ES) and American College of Cryosurgery (ACC). Descriptive statistics and univariate analyses were used to determine variables associated with the use of cryosurgery.
resultsOf the 206 responses received [81 (39.2 %) SUO; 106 (51.5 %) ES; 19 (9.2 %) ACC], 83 (40.3 %) performed cryosurgery. The majority of respondents who utilize cryosurgery do so in unilateral (80.3 %) and bilateral (77.6 %) intermediate-risk PCa. Also, users of this technology indicated significant use in primary treatment (>72 %), salvage treatment (>83 %), in patients who prefer cryosurgery (89.9 %) have a life expectancy ≥10 years (65.8 %) and poor erections (74.7 %). The main reason for not utilizing cryosurgery was the lack of technical expertise (56.7 %). A urologist in a non-academic practice setting was 3.2 times more likely to perform cryosurgery compared to a urologist in an academic setting, p = 0.0001.
conclusionCryosurgery is increasingly being accepted among urologists. However, the need for large-scale studies as well as randomized clinical trials to further delineate the benefits of cryosurgery and convince the non-users and institutions cannot be overemphasized.
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.