ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Does a collecting system injury with grade iv renal blunt trauma always need urinary intervention?
Article in World journal of urology, 2024. 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, 0 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to identify the characteristics associated with the need for urinary intervention for a blunt renal injury with collection system involvement using a computed tomography (CT) protocol for trauma. MATERIALS AND
methodsAbdominal CT images of patients with blunt renal injuries from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed. Patients with low-grade renal trauma, non-collecting system involvement, American Association for the Surgery of Trauma grade V shattered kidney, and emergent nephrectomy were excluded. The largest perinephric mass thickness was measured in the axial view using CT, and a cutoff value was obtained using a receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis. Risk factors for further urinary intervention were analyzed.
resultsAmong the 70 patients included in this study, those with perinephric mass thicknesses < 25 mm (n = 36) had a significantly lower rate of urinary intervention than those with perinephric mass thicknesses ≥ 25 mm (0 vs. 5; p = 0.023). There was no significant difference in the follow-up durations of the groups (19 days vs. 38 days; p = 0.198). More than 90% of the perinephric mass in the < 25 mm group resolved within a median follow-up duration of 38 days, whereas nearly half of the ≥ 25 mm group had a residual perinephric mass during a median follow-up duration of 19 days.
conclusionThe initial CT protocol for trauma was useful for predicting the need for further urinary interventions for collecting system injuries. A perinephric mass thickness < 25 mm is predictive of a low likelihood of requiring urinary intervention.
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.