ArticleScientific reports2021
Endoscopic management versus radical nephroureterectomy for localized upper tract urothelial carcinoma in a high endemic region.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Kidney sparing surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy in upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Endoscopic intervention versus radical nephroureterectomy for the management of localized upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.World journal of urology · 2024Pooled it
- Review
- Kidney-sparing approach for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: An update on current evidence.Asian journal of urology · 2025Review
- Endoscopic ablation versus nephroureterectomy in localized low-grade upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a comparison in terms of cancer-specific and other-cause mortality.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Improving Risk Stratification in pT3 Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Focus on Invasion Patterns.Cancers · 2025Article
- Comparative Analysis of Long-Term Renal Outcomes in Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: Local Ablation Versus Radical Nephroureterectomy.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Article
- Nephron-sparing ureteroscopic surgery vs. radical nephroureterectomy: comparable survival-outcomes in upper tract urothelial carcinoma.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- The long-term outcome of nephron-sparing surgery versus radical nephroureterectomy for organ-localized upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a population-based study of 1969 patients.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2023Article
- Review
- The utility of clinical registries for guiding clinical practice in upper tract urothelial cancer: a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2023Review
- Optimization of postoperative surveillance protocols in upper tract urothelial cancer: A retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- The predictors and surgical outcomes of different distant metastases patterns in upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A SEER-based study.Frontiers in surgery · 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
12 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our aim was to analyze the clinical and survival differences among patients who underwent the two main treatment modalities, endoscopic ablation and radical nephroureterectomy. This study examined all patients who had undergone endoscopic management and RNU between Jul. 1988 and Mar. 2019 from the Taiwan UTUC registry. The inclusion criteria were low stage UTUC in RNU and all cases in endoscopic managed UTUC with a curative intent. The demographic and clinical characteristics were included for analysis. In total, 84 cases in the endoscopic group and 272 cases in the RNU group were enrolled for final analysis. The median follow-up period were 33.5 and 42.0 months in endoscopic and RNU group, respectively (p = 0.082). Comparison of Kaplan-Meier estimated survival curves between groups, the endoscopic group was associated with similar overall survival (OS), cancer specific survival (CSS), and intravesical recurrence free survival (IVRS) but demonstrated inferior disease free survival (DFS) (p = 0.188 for OS, p = 0.493 for CSS and p < 0.001 for DFS). Endoscopic management of UTUC was as safe as RNU in UTUC endemic region.
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.