ArticlePakistan journal of medical sciences
Comparison of voiding vesicoureteral urosonography with fluoroscopic voiding cystourethrography in children with vesicoureteral reflux.
Article in Pakistan journal of medical sciences. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the value and compliance rate of voiding vesicoureteral urosonography in pediatric vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). Methods: This is a retrospective study. A total of 80 children with high-risk VUR admitted to Children's Hospital affiliated to Capital Medical University from December 2018 to December 2020 were selected. All patients underwent voiding urosonography (VUS) and fluoroscopic voiding cystourethrography (VCUG). The sensitivity and compliance of voiding vesicoureteral urosonography were compared, and its application value was evaluated. Results: A total of 160 PUUs were examined, and all cases were normal. Among them, 56 PUUs had reflux (35.00%, 56/160), 46 PUUs had reflux under both examination methods (28.75%, 46/160), and 10 PUUs were only detected under VUS (6.25%, 10/160). Thirty-four cases of VUR (42.50%, 34/80) were diagnosed by VUS, among which 15 cases were bilateral reflux and 4 cases were unilateral reflux. Twenty-five cases (35.00%, 25/80) were diagnosed by VCUG, among which 10 cases were bilateral regurgitation and five cases were unilateral regurgitation. No significant difference was observed in the detection rate of reflux between the two methods (P=0.432). A total of 146 PUUs were found to be consistent between the two methods (91.25%, 160), including 2 Grade-I reflux, 6 Grade-II reflux, 14 Grade-III reflux, 12 Grade-IV reflux, eight Grade-V reflux, and 104 without reflux, demonstrating SATISFACTORY consistency between the two groups (Kappa=0.885). Conclusion: Voiding vesicoureteral urosonography has a high coincidence rate in the detection of vesicoureteral reflux in children.
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.