Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33970257›Full record

SynthesisJAMA network open2021

Assessment of Diagnostic Yield of Cystoscopy and Computed Tomographic Urography for Urinary Tract Cancers in Patients Evaluated for Microhematuria: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Sharon Waisbrod, Anastasios Natsos, Marian Severin Wettstein, Karim Saba, Thomas Hermanns, Christian Daniel Fankhauser, Alexander Müller

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in JAMA network open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-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, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Summary of the Clinical Practice Guidelines for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma 2023 by the Japanese Urological Association.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2024
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Potential of an mRNA-Based Urine Assay (XpertBladder cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Sharon WaisbrodDepartment of Urology, Spital-Limmattal, Schlieren, Switzerland.
Anastasios NatsosDepartment of Urology, Spital-Limmattal, Schlieren, Switzerland.
Marian Severin WettsteinDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Karim SabaDepartment of Urology, Kantonsspital Graubünden, Chur, Switzerland.
Thomas HermannsDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Christian Daniel FankhauserDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Alexander MüllerDepartment of Urology, Spital-Limmattal, Schlieren, Switzerland.
Spital Limmattal · CHUniversity of Zurich · CHKantonsspital Graubünden · CHUniversity Hospital of Zurich · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: Microhematuria (MH) is a common finding that often leads to further evaluation for urinary tract cancers. There is ongoing debate about the extent to which patients with MH should be evaluated for cancer. Objective: To assess the diagnostic yield for detection of urinary tract cancers, specifically bladder cancer, upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC), and kidney cell carcinoma, among patients evaluated for MH using cystoscopy and computed tomographic (CT) urography. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Scopus, and Embase were systematically searched for eligible studies published between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2019. Study Selection: Original prospective and retrospective studies reporting the prevalence of cancer among patients evaluated for MH were eligible. Two authors independently screened the titles and abstracts to select studies that met the eligibility criteria and reached consensus about which studies to include. Among 5802 records identified, 5802 articles were screened using titles and abstracts. After exclusions, 55 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, with 39 studies selected for systematic review. Data Extraction and Synthesis: This systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Studies were quantitatively synthesized using a random-intercept logistic regression model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was diagnostic yield, defined as the proportion of patients with a diagnosis of urinary tract cancer (bladder cancer, UTUC, or kidney cell carcinoma) after presentation with MH. Studies were stratified by the percentage of cystoscopy and CT urography use and by high-risk cohorts. The diagnostic yields of CT urography and cystoscopy were calculated for each cancer type. Results: A total of 30 studies comprising 24 366 patients evaluated for MH were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled diagnostic yield among all patients was 2.00% (95% CI, 1.30%-3.09%) for bladder cancer, 0.02% (95% CI, 0.0%-0.15%) for UTUC, and 0.18% (95% CI, 0.09%-0.36%) for kidney cell carcinoma. Stratification of studies that used cystoscopy and/or CT urography for 95% or more of the cohort produced diagnostic yields of 2.74% (95% CI, 1.81%-4.12%) for bladder cancer, 0.09% (95% CI, 0.01%-0.75%) for UTUC, and 0.10% (95% CI, 0.04%-0.23%) for kidney cell carcinoma. In high-risk cohorts, the diagnostic yields increased to 4.61% (95% CI, 2.34%-8.90%) for bladder cancer and 0.45% (95% CI, 0.22%-0.95%) for UTUC. Conclusions and Relevance: This study's findings suggest that, given the low diagnostic yield of CT urography and the associated risks and costs, limiting its use to high-risk patients older than 50 years is warranted. Risk stratification, as recommended by the recent American Urology Association guidelines on MH, may be a better approach to tailor further evaluation.

Indexed as

HematuriaCystoscopyHumansPredictive Value of TestsUrographyUrologic Neoplasms

Identifiers

PMID33970257
PMCPMC8111485
OpenAlexW3160404400

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.