ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2018
[En bloc resection and vaporization techniques for the treatment of bladder cancer].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2018. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Transurethral resection of bladder tumors (TURBT)].Der Urologe. Ausg. A · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundModifications in resection techniques may overcome obvious limitations of conventionally performed transurethral resection (e. g., tumor fragmentation) of bladder tumors or provide an easier patient treatment algorithm (e. g., tumor vaporization).
objectivesThe present review article summarizes the current literature in terms of en bloc resection techniques, histopathological quality, complication rates, and oncological outcomes. MATERIALS AND
methodsA separate data search was performed for en bloc resection (ERBT, n = 27) and vaporization (n = 15) of bladder tumors.
resultsIn most cases, ERBT is performed in a circumferential fashion. Alternatively, ERBT may be performed by undermining the tumor base via antegrade application of short energy impulses. Based on high rates of detrusor in specimens of ERBT (90-100%), a better histopathological quality is assumed. Significant differences in perioperative complication rates have not been observed, although obturator-nerve-based bladder perforations are not seen when laser energy is used. There is a nonstatistically significant trend towards lower recurrence rates in ERBT groups. Tumor vaporization may provide a less invasive technique for older patients with recurrences of low-risk bladder cancer. It can be performed in an outpatient setting.
conclusionsERBT may provide better histopathological quality. Tumor vaporization is performed in health care systems where reimbursement is adequate.
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.