ArticleTherapeutic advances in urology
The implications when offering percutaneous nephrostomy for the management of malignant obstructive uropathy secondary to urological malignancy: can we be more selective?
Article in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Percutaneous nephrostomy as a marker of clinical vulnerability in non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer: prognostic and infectious implications.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- [Palliative surgery for metastatic prostate cancer].Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2024Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background & Objectives: Percutaneous nephrostomy (PN) for malignant ureteric obstruction (MUO) is increasingly accessible with high success rates. However, it is not without associated risks and morbidity, impacting quality of life, while not improving overall survival. In two UK hospitals, we investigated the outcomes of undergoing PN for MUO, to inform future patient counselling and selection for this intervention. Methods: A retrospective audit of electronic records identified patients that received PN for bladder, and prostate cancer (PCa) between January 2015 and December 2018. Hospital 1 had a 24-h nephrostomy service, while Hospital 2 had a limited service; Group A: recurrent or treatment-resistant PCa, Group B: primary PCa, Group C: Bladder cancer. Results: A total of 261 patients (Hospital 1 = 186, Hospital 2 = 75), had PN insertion. Seventy-eight had prostate or bladder cancer. Group A Conclusion: Most patients with malignant obstruction secondary to prostate or bladder cancer lived less than 12 months after PN insertion. When offering PN, careful consideration of disease prognosis should be made, and frank discussion of the implications of a life-long nephrostomy with patients and relatives.
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.