Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38743260›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of urology2024

Endoscopic intervention versus radical nephroureterectomy for the management of localized upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.

Carlo Giulioni, Carlo Brocca, Pietro Tramanzoli, Silvia Stramucci, Matteo Mantovan, Leonard Perpepaj, Andrea Cicconofri, Vineet Gauhar, Axel Stuart Merseburger, Andrea Benedetto Galosi and 1 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Carlo GiulioniDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy. carlo.giulioni9@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9934-4011
Carlo BroccaDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Pietro TramanzoliDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Silvia StramucciDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Matteo MantovanDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Leonard PerpepajDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Andrea CicconofriDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Vineet GauharDepartment of Urology, Ng Teng Fong General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore.
Axel Stuart MerseburgerDepartment of Urology, University Lübeck, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Lübeck, Germany.
Andrea Benedetto GalosiDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.
Daniele CastellaniDepartment of Urology, Urology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria delle Marche, Polytechnic University of Marche, 71 Conca Street, 60126, Ancona, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveLocalized Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma (UTUC) is an uncommon cancer typically detected at an advanced stage. Currently, radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) with bladder cuff excision is the standard treatment for high-risk UTUC. This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the 5-year overall and cancer-specific survival and bladder recurrence rates in studies comparing endoscopic kidney-sparing surgeries (E-KSS) with RNU in localized UTUC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a literature search on 20th April 2023 through PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus. The PICOS model was used for study inclusion: P: adult patients with localized UTUC; I: E-KSS. C: RNU; O: primary: overall survival (OS); secondary: cancer-specific survival (CSS), bladder recurrence rate, and metastasis-free survival (MFS). S: retrospective, prospective, and randomized studies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Overall, 11 studies involving 2284 patients were eligible for this meta-analysis, 737 in the E-KSS group and 1547 in the RNU group. E-KSS showed a similar overall 5-year OS between E-KSS and RNU, and for low-grade tumors, while 5-year OS favored RNU for high-grade tumors (RR 1.84, 95% CI 1.26-2.69, p = 0.002). No difference emerged for 5-year CSS between the two groups, even when the results were stratified for low- and high grade tumors. Bladder recurrence rate and 5-year MFS were also similar between the two groups.

conclusionsOur review showed that E-KSS is a viable option for patients with localized UTUC with non-inferior oncological outcomes as compared with RNU, except for 5-year OS in high-grade tumors which favoured RNU.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Transitional CellKidney NeoplasmsNephroureterectomyUreteral NeoplasmsHumansUreteroscopyEndoscopic treatmentLocalized upper urinary tract urothelial carcinomaNephron-sparing surgeryRadical nephroureterectomySurvival

Identifiers

PMID38743260
PMCPMC11093876

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.