ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2021
Prognostic impact of perirenal fat stranding on oncologic outcomes in ureteral urothelial carcinoma.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association of CT-based perirenal structural characteristics with chronic kidney disease risk categories: the additional value of imaging.Acta diabetologica · 2026Article
- Article
- Article
- Perirenal fat stranding as a predictor of disease progression after radical nephroureterectomy for renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma: a retrospective study.Discover oncology · 2023Article
- Role of Renal Parenchyma Attenuation and Perirenal Fat Stranding in Chest CT of Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePerirenal fat stranding (PRFS) is defined as linear areas of soft-tissue attenuation in the perirenal space that can result from ureteral obstruction. We analyzed the prognostic impact of PRFS on outcomes in patients with ureteral urothelial carcinoma (UC). MATERIALS AND
methodsOverall, 126 patients evaluated preoperatively by computerized tomography (CT) scan and diagnosed with ureteral UC following nephroureterectomy between January 2001 and May 2018 were included. We analyzed associations between oncologic outcomes and secondary signs such as hydronephrosis and PRFS.
resultsOverall, 68 patients (54.0%) showed PRFS on preoperative CT scans. The patients' mean age was 66.33±9.49 years. A high pT stage (≥T3) was seen in 47 patients (37.3%) and high-grade tumors were seen in 90 patients (71.4%). Lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was seen in 15 patients (11.9%), and 5 (4.0%) were at the pN1 stage. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that cT stage≥3, PRFS, pT stage≥3, tumor grade, LVI, and pN1 stage were independent prognostic factors of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) (all p<0.05).
conclusionsPRFS was found to be an independent prognostic factor for RFS and CSS. PRFS is easily detectable in preoperative CT imaging and may be useful for improving the prediction of oncologic outcomes of ureteral UC. Therefore, PRFS along with other important preoperative CT findings can help urologists give preoperative advice to patients with ureteral UC before surgical management.
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.