Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33861058›Full record

SynthesisInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology

Bricker ileal conduit vs. Cutaneous ureterostomy after radical cystectomy for bladder cancer: a systematic review.

Fernando Korkes, Eduardo Fernandes, Felipe Arakaki Gushiken, Felipe Placco Araujo Glina, Willy Baccaglini, Frederico Timóteo, Sidney Glina

Open access · diamondAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Retroperitoneal cutaneous ureterostomy following radical cystectomy: A multicenter comparative study of robotic versus open surgery.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. [Urinary diversion in old patients (80+ years)].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fernando KorkesDivisão de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Eduardo FernandesDivisão de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Felipe Arakaki GushikenDivisão de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Felipe Placco Araujo GlinaDivisão de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Willy BaccagliniDivisão de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Frederico TimóteoDivisão de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Sidney GlinaDivisão de Urologia, Faculdade de Medicina do ABC, Santo André, SP, Brasil.
Faculdade de Medicina do ABC · BRHospital Israelita Albert Einstein · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA systematic review of the literature with available published literature to compare ileal conduit (IC) and cutaneous ureterostomy (CU) urinary diversions (UD) in terms of perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of high-risk elderly patients treated with radical cystectomy (RC). Protocol Registration: PROSPERO ID CRD42020168851. MATERIALS AND

methodsA systematic review, according to the PRISMA Statement, was performed. Search through the Medline, Embase, Scopus, Scielo, Lilacs, and Cochrane Database until July 2020.

resultsThe literature search yielded 2,883 citations and were selected eight studies, including 1096 patients. A total of 707 patients underwent IC and 389 CU. Surgical procedures and outcomes, complications, mortality, and quality of life were analyzed.

conclusionsCU seems to be a safe alternative for the elderly and more frail patients. It is associated with faster surgery, less blood loss, lower transfusion rates, a lower necessity of intensive care, and shorter hospital stay. According to most studies, complications are less frequent after CU, even though mortality rates are similar. Studies with long-term follow up are awaited.

Indexed as

Urinary Bladder NeoplasmsUrinary DiversionAgedCystectomyHumansQuality of LifeUreterostomyCystectomySystematic Review [Publication Type]Urinary Bladder Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID33861058
PMCPMC8691241
OpenAlexW3155824063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.