Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34551916›Full record

ArticleBMJ case reports2021

Unusual endophytic non-enhancing tumour in the renal pelvis: a diagnostic dilemma.

Murali Krishna, Santosh Kumar, Kalpesh Mahesh Parmar, Venkatesh Dhana Sekaran

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ case reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Murali KrishnaUrology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, Chandigarh, India.
Santosh KumarHistopathology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, Chandigarh, India.
Kalpesh Mahesh ParmarUrology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, Chandigarh, India kalpesh010385@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3891-4089
Venkatesh Dhana SekaranHistopathology, PGIMER, Chandigarh, Chandigarh, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Renal cell cancer (RCC) is incidentally detected on imaging in 50%-60% of cases. Among the RCCs, clear cell variant is most common and classically seen as heterogenous enhancing lesion on CT imaging. Hypoenhancing mass presents a diagnostic dilemma with differential diagnosis being urothelial carcinoma, fat poor angiomyolipoma, oncocytoma or rarer variants of RCC. Such cases require further evaluation in form of urine cytology or newer molecular diagnostic techniques. Here, we present a case of renal mass with minimal enhancement on CT scan and imaging features suggestive of upper tract urothelial cancer. Final histopathology revealed the mass to be chromophobe variant of renal cell carcinoma.

Indexed as

Adenoma, OxyphilicCarcinoma, Renal CellCarcinoma, Transitional CellKidney NeoplasmsUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansKidney PelvisSensitivity and Specificitypathologyradiologyurological cancerurological surgery

Identifiers

PMID34551916
PMCPMC8461285

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.