Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34009488›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2021

Staged Fowler Stephens, Who Requires a Third Procedure?

Mitchell Hayes, Amir Patel, Casey Seideman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 91% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mitchell HayesDepartment of Urology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Amir PatelDepartment of Urology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA. pateamir@ohsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6298-6421
Casey SeidemanDepartment of Urology, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA.
Oregon Health & Science University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe two-stage Fowler-Stephens orchiopexy is a well-described surgical approach for most pediatric urologists tackling the high intra-abdominal testis. Testicular ascent is a well-reported outcome of the surgery and a problem that could be fixed with a repeat procedure. The purpose of this review is to determine the rate of subsequent testicular ascent and repeat surgery after a two-stage Fowler-Stephens using best available evidence. RECENT FINDINGS/

resultWe selected 16 studies that pertained to our topic. 0-13% of testicles were deemed to be in an inappropriate position on follow-up (6-37 months). The definition of appropriate postoperative position varied between studies and rates of repeat procedures were sparsely available. Available data reports a repeat orchiopexy rate of 2.6-7.5% after two-stage Fowler-Stephens. Two-stage Fowler-Stephens orchiopexy is a highly successful surgical technique to manage high intra-abdominal testes. Rates of testicular ascent are difficult to ascertain due to varying definitions and small sample sizes. While repeat procedures are typically indicated, the actual rate of repeat orchiopexy is rarely reported and long-term outcomes following a third procedure is sparse.

Indexed as

CryptorchidismFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleOrchiopexyTestisCryptorchidismFowler-StephensOrchiopexyOutcomesTesticular ascentUndescended testicle

Identifiers

PMID34009488
OpenAlexW3162298755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.