ArticleFrontiers in oncology2022
Inadvertent radical nephrectomy leads to worse prognosis in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma patients: A propensity score-matched study.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To compare overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) in renal pelvic urothelial carcinoma (RPUC) patients treated with radical nephroureterectomy (NU) and inadvertent radical nephrectomy (RN). Patients and methods: In this retrospective study, patients with RPUC who underwent NU or RN diagnosed between 2004 and 2017 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. To adjust the confounders, the propensity score-matched analysis was conducted. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were performed to explore the effect of different surgical methods on OS and CSS. Results: A total of 2197 cases were finally included in this analysis, among which, 187 (8.5%) patients were treated with RN and 2010 (91.5%) patients were treated with NU. Before matching, the survival analysis revealed that the OS (HR: 1.444, 95%CI: 1.197, 1.741) and CSS (HR: 1.522, 95%CI: 1.211, 1.914) of patients who received RN were worse than that of patients who received NU (p = 0.0001 and p = 0.0003, respectively). After matching, the RN group had a worse OS (HR: 1.298, 95%CI: 1.002, 1.682) than the NU group (p = 0.048). No significant difference was observed in CSS between the RN and NU groups (p = 0.282). The hierarchical analysis showed that there was no significant difference observed in OS and CSS in patients with tumor size ≤4.2 cm (p = 0.884 and p = 0.496, respectively). In tumor size >4.2 cm, both OS (HR: 1.545, 95%CI: 1.225, 1.948) and CSS (HR: 1.607, 95%CI: 1.233, 2.095) of patients who received RN were worse than those of patients who received NU (p = 0.0002 and p = 0.0005). Conclusion: RN could lead to worse oncological outcomes than NU in patients with renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma. Accurate diagnosis of renal pelvis urothelial carcinoma is extremely important.
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.