Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33683778›Full record

SynthesisBJU international2021

Impact of enhanced optical techniques at time of transurethral resection of bladder tumour, with or without single immediate intravesical chemotherapy, on recurrence rate of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials.

Reza Sari Motlagh, Keiichiro Mori, Ekaterina Laukhtina, Abdulmajeed Aydh, Satoshi Katayama, Nico C Grossmann, Hadi Mostafai, Benjamin Pradere, Fahad Quhal, Victor M Schuettfort and 5 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BJU international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.0field-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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  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

15 authors at 13 institutions in 14 countries.

Reza Sari MotlaghDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-3819-9911
Keiichiro MoriDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6147-6569
Ekaterina LaukhtinaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-8953-0272
Abdulmajeed AydhDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6078-6816
Satoshi KatayamaDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-8377-2457
Nico C GrossmannDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Hadi MostafaiDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5596-1771
Benjamin PradereDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7768-8558
Fahad QuhalDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Victor M SchuettfortDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Mohammad Reza RoshandelDepartment of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6342-2989
Pierre I KarakiewiczCancer Prognostics and Health Outcomes Unit, University of Montreal Health Centre, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jeremy TeohS.H.Ho Urology, Department of Surgery, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.ORCID 0000-0002-9361-2342
Shahrokh F ShariatDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Harun FajkovicDepartment of Urology, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Comprehensive Cancer Center Vienna · ATChinese University of Hong Kong · HKIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · USJikei University School of Medicine · JPKing Fahad Specialist Hospital · SAKing Fahd Medical City · SAMcGill University Health Centre · CAOkayama University · JPSechenov University · RUTabriz University of Medical Sciences · IRUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversité de Tours · FRUniversity of Jordan · JO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess whether single immediate intravesical chemotherapy (SIIC) adds value to bladder tumour management in combination with novel optical techniques: enhanced transurethral resection of bladder tumour (TURBT).

methodsA systematic search was performed using the PubMed and Web of Science databases in September 2020 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) extension statement for network meta-analyses. Studies that compared recurrence rates among intervention groups (TURBT with photodynamic diagnosis [PDD] ± SIIC, narrow-band imaging [NBI] ± SIIC, or white-light cystoscopy [WLC] + SIIC) and a control group (TURBT with WLC alone) were included. We used the Bayesian approach in the network meta-analysis.

resultsTwenty-two studies (n = 4519) met our eligibility criteria. Out of six different interventions including three different optical techniques, compared to WLC alone, blue-light cystoscopy (BLC) plus SIIC (odds ratio [OR] 0.349, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0.196-0.601) and BLC alone (OR 0.668, 95% CrI 0.459-0.931) were associated with a significantly lower likelihood of 12-month recurrence rate. In the sensitivity analysis, out of eight different interventions compared to WLC alone, PDD by 5-aminolevulinic acid plus SIIC (OR 0.327, 95% CrI 0.159-0.646) and by hexaminolevulinic acid plus SIIC (OR 0.376, 95% CrI 0.172-0.783) were both associated with a significantly lower likelihood of 12-month recurrence rate. NBI with and without SIIC was not associated with a significantly lower likelihood of 12-month recurrence rate (OR 0.385, 95% CrI 0.105-1.29 and OR 0.653, 95% CrI 0.343-1.15).

conclusionBlue-light cystoscopy during TURBT with concomitant SIIC seems to yield superior recurrence outcomes in patients with non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The use of PDD was able to reduce the 12-month recurrence rate; moreover, concomitant SIIC increased this risk benefit by a 32% additional reduction in odds ratio. Although using PDD could reduce the recurrence rate, SIIC remains necessary. Moreover, ranking analysis showed that both PDD and NBI, plus SIIC, were better than these techniques alone.

Indexed as

Administration, IntravesicalCombined Modality TherapyCystectomyHumansNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUrethraUrinary Bladder Neoplasms#BladderCancer#blcsmblue-light cystoscopyhexaminolevulinic acidnarrow band imagingnon-muscle-invasive urothelial carcinomaphotodynamic diagnosissingle immediate intravesical chemotherapy#uroonc

Identifiers

PMID33683778
PMCPMC8453975
OpenAlexW3134629139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.