Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34469674›Full record

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

Clinical and radiographic outcomes following salvage intervention for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.

Joseph J Crivelli, Brett A Johnson, Ryan L Steinberg, Jeffrey C Gahan, Jodi A Antonelli, Allen F Morey, Margaret S Pearle, Jeffrey A Cadeddu

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article 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 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Joseph J CrivelliDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Brett A JohnsonDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Ryan L SteinbergDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Jeffrey C GahanDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Jodi A AntonelliDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Allen F MoreyDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Margaret S PearleDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
Jeffrey A CadedduDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, United States.
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center · USUnited States University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to assess failure rates of salvage interventions and changes in split kidney function (SKF) following failed primary repair of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO). MATERIALS AND

methodsA retrospective review of adult patients at an academic medical center who underwent salvage intervention following primary treatment for UPJO was performed. Symptomatic failure was defined as significant flank pain. Radiographic failure was defined as no improvement in drainage or a decrease in SKF by ≥7%. Overall failure, the primary outcome, was defined as symptomatic failure, radiographic failure, or both.

resultsBetween 2008-2017, 34 patients (median age 38 years, 50% men) met study criteria. UPJO management was primary pyeloplasty/secondary endopyelotomy for 21/34 (62%), primary pyeloplasty/secondary pyeloplasty for 6/34 (18%), and primary endopyelotomy/secondary pyeloplasty for 7/34 (21%). Median follow-up was 3.3 years following secondary intervention. Patients undergoing primary pyeloplasty/secondary endopyelotomy had significantly higher overall failure than those undergoing primary pyeloplasty/secondary pyeloplasty (16/21 [76%] vs. 1/6 [17%], p=0.015). Among patients undergoing secondary endopyelotomy, presence of a stricture on retrograde pyelogram, stricture length, and SKF were not associated with symptomatic, radiographic, or overall failure. Serial renography was performed for 28/34 (82%) patients and 2/28 (7%) had a significant decline in SKF.

conclusionsFollowing failed primary pyeloplasty, secondary endopyelotomy had a greater overall failure rate than secondary pyeloplasty. No radiographic features assessed were associated with secondary endopyelotomy failure. Secondary intervention overall failure rates were higher than reported in the literature. Unique to this study, serial renography demonstrated that significant functional loss was overall infrequent.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyUreteral ObstructionAdultFemaleHumansKidney PelvisMaleRetrospective StudiesUrologic Surgical ProceduresCakut [Supplementary Concept]Kidney Function TestsSalvage Therapy

Identifiers

PMID34469674
PMCPMC8486453
OpenAlexW3198068332

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.