Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27877196›Full record

ArticleJournal of contemporary brachytherapy2011

Prophylactic urethral stenting with Memokath

Samuel T Chao, Kenneth Angermeier, Eric A Klein, Chandana A Reddy, James C Ulchaker, Andrew Stephenson, Steven Campbell, Jay P Ciezki

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Samuel T ChaoDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Kenneth AngermeierDepartment of Urology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, USA.
Eric A KleinDepartment of Urology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, USA.
Chandana A ReddyDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
James C UlchakerDepartment of Urology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, USA.
Andrew StephensonDepartment of Urology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, USA.
Steven CampbellDepartment of Urology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, USA.
Jay P CiezkiDepartment of Radiation Oncology.
Cleveland Clinic · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo study the feasibility/toxicity of urethral stenting with the Memokath MATERIAL AND

methodsAn Investigational Device Exemption from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and institutional review board (IRB) approval were obtained. Twenty patients enrolled. Baseline American Urological Association (AUA) score was obtained prior to PI. Follow-up information was obtained with weekly phone calls for the first 12 weeks and biweekly calls for the next 12 weeks to assess toxicity and AUA score. Removal of the stent was planned at six months after PI, or earlier due to excessive toxicity/patient request.

resultsMedian age was 66.5 years. The median prostate volume was 39 cc (range: 10-90). The median baseline AUA score was 7.5 (range: 1-21). Three patients required intermittent self-catheterization (ISC) within 3 days after PI. No patients required ISC beyond day 3 after PI. The median duration of ISC was 1 day (range: 1-2). AUA scores returned to baseline values 6 weeks after PI. The week 6 AUA score was 10 (range: 4-16). Seven patients (35%) underwent early removal because of patient preference. The reasons were: incontinence (

conclusionsUrethral stenting with Memokath

Indexed as

prostate brachytherapyprostate cancerurethral obstructionurethral stent

Identifiers

PMID27877196
PMCPMC5108832
OpenAlexW2184281350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.