ArticleDiagnostic pathology2022
A surgical case of high-grade urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis complicated with giant hydronephrosis, giving rise to diagnostic difficulties on a cytological examination.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Giant right hydronephrosis with underlying double malignancy: a case report.The Pan African medical journal · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe report a surgical case of urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis, resulting in diagnostic difficulties on cytological examination. CASE PRESENTATION: A man in his late 70s underwent nephrectomy for giant hydronephrosis and renal cysts after nephrostomy and renal cyst puncture and drainage. On all cytological examinations performed before surgery, including nephrostomy urine, renal cyst fluid, catheterized bladder urine, and bladder washings, we were unable to make any conclusive diagnosis of malignancy. The pathological diagnosis of the surgical specimen concluded that this was a case of high-grade urothelial carcinoma of the renal pelvis with focal squamous differentiation (pT4). Liver and lung metastases were identified 3 months after surgery, and the patient died 2 months later.
conclusionIt was very difficult to make a conclusive diagnosis using cytological specimens because of the presence of a small number of atypical cells with severe degenerative changes. Since clinicians cannot predict the potential for malignancy on preoperative imaging findings, it is critical to consider the difficulties in clinically making a correct diagnosis of urothelial carcinoma of the upper urinary tract, especially in cases complicated with giant hydronephrosis.
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.