ArticleAsian journal of urology2016
Who needs further evaluations to diagnose upper urinary tract urothelial cancers among patients with abnormal findings by enhanced CT?
Article in Asian journal of urology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Risk Factors for Early Intravesical Recurrence After Radical Nephroureterectomy for Upper Urinary Tract Carcinoma According to the History of Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveWe evaluated who would need further evaluations such as retrograde pyelography (RP) and/or ureteroscopy to diagnose upper urinary tract urothelial cancers (UUTUCs) when abnormal findings for the upper urinary tract (UUT) were detected by enhanced computed tomography (CT).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 125 patients who underwent enhanced CT for various reasons and had abnormal findings for the UUT. Patients whose tumors were suspected to be of extraureteral origin were excluded. All patients received RP and/or ureteroscopy to evaluate the UUTUCs.
resultsThe median age of the 125 patients was 70 years and gross hematuria (26.4%) was the most frequently observed symptoms. RP, ureteroscopy and both were performed for 121, 59 and 55 patients, respectively. CT revealed tumor-like lesions in 58 patients and the other patients had non-tumor-like lesions. UUTUCs were found in 43 (34.4%) of the 125 patients. All of them had tumor-like lesions on CT. In 58 patients who had tumor-like lesions on CT, univariate and multivariate analyses revealed that tumor diameter and tumor enhancement were significant predictive factors for UUTUCs. ROC curve analysis of enhanced CT to diagnose UUTUCs revealed that a tumor diameter of 18 mm was the best cutoff point. The sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were 90.0%, 98.8% and 92.7% for RP and 95.5%, 100% and 97.1% for ureteroscopy, respectively. Both of them had high sensitivity, specificity and accuracy.
conclusionWe should decide to evaluate the UUT according to the tumor diameter on enhanced CT. When we evaluate the UUT in patients with tumor diameters of less than 20 mm, ureteroscopy is recommended.
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.