Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29662543›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology2017

Optical improvements in the diagnosis of bladder cancer: implications for clinical practice.

Tina Schubert, Steffen Rausch, Omar Fahmy, Georgios Gakis, Arnulf Stenzl

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Photodynamic Therapy for Bladder Cancers, A Focused ReviewPhotochemistry and photobiology · 2023
    Review
  5. DNA Hydroxymethylation in Smoking-Associated Cancers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Use of IMAGE1 S technology for detection of cholesteatoma in endoscopic ear surgery: a retrospective case series on 45 patients.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2021
    Article
  10. Multiparametric cystoscopy: is the future here yet?Translational andrology and urology · 2021
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Tina SchubertDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Steffen RauschDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Omar FahmyDepartment of Urology, University Putra Malaysia (UPM), Selangor, Malaysia.
Georgios GakisDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Arnulf StenzlDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Tübingen, Hoppe-Seyler-Str. 3, Tübingen, 72076, Germany.
University Children's Hospital Tübingen · DEUniversiti Putra Malaysia · MY

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor over 100 years white-light cystoscopy has remained the gold-standard technique for the detection of bladder cancer (BCa). Some limitations in the detection of flat lesions (CIS), the differentiation between inflammation and malignancy, the inaccurate determination of the tumor margin status as well as the tumor depth, have led to a variety of technological improvements. The aim of this review is to evaluate the impact of these improvements in the diagnosis of BCa and their effectiveness in clinical practice.

methodsA systematic literature search was conducted according to the PRISMA statement to identify studies reporting on imaging modalities in the diagnosis of NMIBC between 2000 and 2017. A two-stage selection process was utilized to determine eligible studies. A total of 74 studies were considered for final analysis.

resultsOptical imaging technologies have emerged as an adjunct to white-light cystoscopy and can be classified according to their scope as macroscopic, microscopic and molecular. Macroscopic techniques including photodynamic diagnosis (PDD), narrow-band imaging (NBI) and the Storz Professional Image Enhancement System (IMAGE1 S, formerly known as SPIES) are similar to white-light cystoscopy, but are superior in the detection of bladder tumors by means of contrast enhancement. Especially the detection rate of very mute lesions in the bladder mucosa (CIS) could be significantly increased by the use of these methods. Microscopic imaging techniques like confocal laser endomicroscopy and optical coherence tomography permit a real-time high-resolution assessment of the bladder mucosa at a cellular and sub-cellular level with spatial resolutions similar to histology, enabling the surgeon to perform an 'optical biopsy'. Molecular techniques are based on the combination of optical imaging technologies with fluorescence labeling of cancer-specific molecular agents like antibodies. This labeling is intended to favor an optical distinction between benign and malignant tissue.

conclusionsOptical improvements of the standard white-light cystoscopy have proven their benefit in the detection of BCa and have found their way into clinical practice. Especially the combination of macroscopic and microscopic techniques may improve diagnostic accuracy. Nevertheless, HAL-PDD guided cystoscopy is the only approach approved for routine use in the diagnosis of BCa by most urological associations in the EU and USA to date.

Indexed as

bladder cancercystoscopydiagnosisimageoptical

Identifiers

PMID29662543
PMCPMC5896854
OpenAlexW2751547910

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.