Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36018366›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of urology2022

Posterior urethral stenosis: a comparative review of the guidelines.

Behzad Abbasi, Nathan M Shaw, Jason L Lui, Kevin D Li, Architha Sudhakar, Patrick Low, Nizar Hakam, Behnam Nabavizadeh, Benjamin N Breyer

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of urology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Behzad AbbasiDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7175-9984
Nathan M ShawDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Jason L LuiDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Kevin D LiDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Architha SudhakarDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Patrick LowDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Nizar HakamDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Behnam NabavizadehDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA.
Benjamin N BreyerDepartment of Urology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, USA. Benjamin.Breyer@ucsf.edu.
University of California, San Francisco · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to provide a thorough comparative review of the available guidelines on the diagnosis, management, and follow-up for patients with posterior urethral stenosis by the American Urologic Association (2016), Société Internationale d'Urologie (2010), and European Urologic Association (2022).

methodsThe AUA, SIU, and EAU guidelines were evaluated for recommendations on the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of posterior urethral stenosis. We also included the EAU and AUA urologic trauma guidelines for the trauma-related stenosis. The level or strength of recommendations is included in case of disparity between the guidelines.

resultsThe three guidelines align considerably in recommendations provided for the diagnosis, management, and follow-up of patients with posterior urethral stenosis. SIU and EAU emphasize the role of repeat endoscopic treatment in guidelines compared to AUA.

conclusionThe preferred method to repair bulbo-membranous stricture/stenosis following radiation therapy remains an area of active interest, focusing on continence preservation. Additionally, there may be a role for advanced endoscopic treatments with or without adjunct therapies to manage even obliterated stenoses.

Indexed as

Urethral StrictureUrologic DiseasesUrologyConstriction, PathologicHumansMaleUrethraUrologic Surgical Procedures, MaleBladder neck contracturePelvic fracture urethral injuryPosteriorUrethral stenosisUrethral strictureVesico-urethral anastomotic stenosis

Identifiers

PMID36018366
PMCPMC9617833
OpenAlexW4293116069

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.