ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2024
The clinical study of urinary flow parameters after drag-and-bond anastomosis for ileal orthotopic neobladder reconstruction.
Article 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 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.
- Efficacy evaluation of urethral dragging-and-adhesion anastomosis in ileal orthotopic neobladder reconstruction following laparoscopic radical cystectomy: a dual-center retrospective study.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Minimally Invasive Treatment of Left Renal Staghorn Calculus After Orthotopic Neobladder Surgery: A Case Report and Literature Review.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
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
Abstract
aimTo assess the viability of this procedure in laparoscopic radical cystectomy with ileal orthotopic neobladder reconstruction, the objective of this study is to examine the relationship between urinary flow parameters of urethral drag-and-bond anastomosis in the reconstruction of the ileal orthotopic neobladder.
methods36 patients with bladder cancer underwent laparoscopic radical cystectomy with ileal orthotopic neobladder reconstruction at Jiangxi provincial people's hospital between June 2016 and January 2021,16 patients underwent intermittent urethral anastomosis, while 20 patients underwent neobladder-urethral drag-and-bond anastomosis. The maximum bladder capacity, residual urine output, maximum urinary flow rate, and outlet morphology of the new bladder neck were all monitored throughout postoperative follow-up regularly.
resultsThere was no significant difference between the urethral drag-and-bond anastomosis group (group A) and the conventional anastomosis group (group B) at 3 months and 12 months after surgery, and the maximum bladder capacity (3 months, 488.35 ± 51.56 ml vs 481.06 ± 40.61 ml, t = -0.462, P = 0.647; 12 months, 496.35 ± 51.09 ml vs 476.56 ± 56.33 ml, t = -1.103, P = 0.278), residual urine output (3 months, 44.15 ± 24.12 ml vs 38.69 ± 21.82 ml, t = -0.704, P = 0.486;12 months, 49.65 ± 26.95 ml vs 36.75 ± 21.96 ml, t = -1.546, P = 0.131) and maximum urine flow rate (3 months, 12.36 ± 2.63 ml/s vs 13.60 ± 2.82 ml/s, t = 1.361, P = 0.182;12 months, 12.18 ± 3.14 ml/s vs 11.13 ± 3.01 ml/s, t = -1.004, P = 0.322) of the two groups were not significant (P > 0.05). The new bladder outlet morphology was not distorted in group A patients, the continuity was good, and there were fewer associated complications.
conclusionsThere was no significant difference in postoperative urodynamic parameters between the urethral drag-and-bond anastomosis group and the conventional anastomosis group, and the postoperative new bladder outlet was in good shape, with clinical significance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38502467What 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.