Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32015617›Full record

ArticleUrology annals

Outcome of salvage ureteral reimplantation after endoscopic treatment failure for high-grade vesicoureteral reflux compared to primary ureteral reimplantation.

Tariq Burki, Muhammad S Howeiti, Maha K Almadhi, Fayez M Al Modhen, Hamdan Alhazmi, Santiago A Vallasciani, Abdulwahab E Alhams, Shahbaz W Mehmood, Ahmed M Al Shammari

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Urology annals. 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
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tariq BurkiPediatric Urology Division, King Abdullah Specialized Children Hospital, King Abdul Aziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affair, Riyadh, KSA.
Muhammad S HoweitiPediatric Urology Division, King Abdullah Specialized Children Hospital, King Abdul Aziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affair, Riyadh, KSA.
Maha K AlmadhiDivision of Pediatric Urology, Department of Urology, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, KSA.
Fayez M Al ModhenPediatric Urology Division, King Abdullah Specialized Children Hospital, King Abdul Aziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affair, Riyadh, KSA.
Hamdan AlhazmiDivision of Urology, Department of Surgery, College of Medicine, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, Riyadh, KSA.
Santiago A VallascianiDivision of Pediatric Urology, Department of Urology, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, KSA.
Abdulwahab E AlhamsPediatric Urology Division, King Abdullah Specialized Children Hospital, King Abdul Aziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affair, Riyadh, KSA.
Shahbaz W MehmoodDepartment of Urology, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center Riyadh, KSA.
Ahmed M Al ShammariPediatric Urology Division, King Abdullah Specialized Children Hospital, King Abdul Aziz Medical City, National Guard Health Affair, Riyadh, KSA.
National Guard Health Affairs · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSurgical treatment of vesicoureteral reflux is required after conservative treatment has failed. However, there is a controversy if fibrosis related to previous attempts of dextranomer/hyaluronic acid (Dx/Ha) injection increases the risk of surgical difficulty and postoperative complications. Therefore, the purpose of our study was to compare the outcome of salvage ureteral reimplantation (SUR), after failed endoscopic therapy, to that of primary ureteral reimplantation in patients with high-grade primary vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of children, <14 years old, treated for Grade IV or V VUR, between 1998 and 2014. Cases were classified into the SUR or the PUR group. Cases of secondary VUR were excluded. All patients were treated using a cross-trigonal ureteral reimplantation technique by two surgeons. The following demographic and clinical variables were included in the analysis: presentation, reflux severity, scarring on imaging, age at endoscopic injection, total amount of Dx/Ha injected, operative time, postoperative hospital stay, operative complications, incidence of febrile urinary tract infections (UTIs) after surgery, and persistent VUR. Between the groups, differences were evaluated using Fisher's exact test.

resultsTwenty-six patients were included, 19 in the SUR and 7 in the primary ureteral reimplantation (PUR) group. In the SUR group, 12 cases had a bilateral VUR and 7 had a unilateral VUR, with 4 bilateral and 3 unilateral VUR cases in the PUR group. In the SUR group, 13 patients had received one Dx/Ha injections, with the other 6 receiving two injections, of 0.5 ml of Dx/Ha (range, 0.5-2.0 ml). A bilateral reimplantation was performed in 14/19 patients in the SUR group and 4/7 in the PUR group. The median age at surgery was 4 years in the SUR group and 3 years in the PUR group (

conclusionSUR for high-grade primary VUR after failed Dx/Ha injection has the same success rate as PUR, with no significant complication rate, although the necessary dissection may be more difficult.

Indexed as

Failed endoscopic treatmentureteral reimplantationvesicoureteral reflux

Identifiers

PMID32015617
PMCPMC6978971
OpenAlexW2998031674

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.