ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2024
Malakoplakia of urinary bladde: 3 cases reports and review.
Review in International urology and nephrology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case report: A rare case of malacoplakia resembling a malignant tumor of the cervix: a case report and review of the literature.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to explore the clinical diagnosis and treatment methods of bladder malakoplakia (MUB) to enhance the understanding of the disease.
methodsA retrospective analysis of the diagnosis and treatment processes of three cases of MUB treated in our department was conducted. Relevant literature from both domestic and international sources was reviewed to provide a comprehensive analysis.
resultsAll three patients underwent transurethral resection of bladder lesions combined with antibiotic therapy, and two of them received transurethral instillation of gemcitabine. There were two cases with two recurrences each, and one case with four recurrences, with the latter also concurrently presenting with unilateral ureteral malakoplakia. Postoperative pathology confirmed MUB in all three cases. Close follow-up revealed no significant recurrence in the patients.
conclusionThe effective diagnosis rate is increased by conducting multiple deep, repetitive, and randomly selected live tissue examinations. The definitive diagnosis of MUB relies on pathological histological examination. Treatment involving a combination of antibiotics and transurethral resection of bladder lesions proves to be effective. Exploring the use of bladder instillation of gemcitabine widens the spectrum of MUB treatment methods.
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.