ReviewCurrent urology reports2021
Role of Ureteroscopy in Treatment of Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.
Review in Current urology reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Organ-preserving treatment for urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Automated Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma Tumor Segmentation During Ureteroscopy Using Computer Vision Techniques.Journal of endourology · 2024Article
- A Novel Preoperative Prediction Model Based on Deep Learning to Predict Neoplasm T Staging and Grading in Patients with Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Endoscopic Ablation of Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Report of Two Cases with Long Disease Recurrence-Free Periods.Yonago acta medica · 2022Article
- The predictors and surgical outcomes of different distant metastases patterns in upper tract urothelial carcinoma: A SEER-based study.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewUpper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is uncommon accounting for less than 10% of all urothelial tumours. Ureteroscopic management (URS) is the first line treatment for low-risk disease and has been increasingly utilised due to technological advances and increasing surgical experience. This review looks at patient outcomes relating to URS, emerging technologies and the role of adjuvant intracavitary therapy in the management of UTUC. RECENT
findingsURS has firmly established itself in the management algorithm for UTUC, and a good body of evidence supports its use for low-risk disease, wherein oncological outcomes are comparable to traditional nephroureterectomy (RNU). Larger tumours can now be managed using URS with a lower morbidity than radical surgery, though with higher associated local recurrence rate and risk of progression to RNU, and as a result, patient selection and close surveillance remains key. There is limited evidence for adjuvant intracavitary therapy (Mitomycin C or BCG) in UTUC although the development of novel polymers and biodegradable stents may improve drug delivery to the upper urinary tract. URS has a clearly defined role in low-risk UTUC, and its use in larger tumours appears to be appropriate in a selected cohort of patients. The efficacy of adjuvant intracavitary therapy is as of yet undetermined, though developments in delivery techniques are promising. Likewise further developments of laser technology are anticipated to further expand the role of URS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.