ArticleWorld journal of urology2024
Ideal cystoscopic interval after nephroureterectomy in patients with upper tract urothelial carcinoma.
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. 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.
- Differential Risk Factors for Early Intravesical Recurrence After Radical Nephroureterectomy for Upper Urinary Tract Carcinoma According to the History of Non-Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to clarify the appropriate cystoscopic interval after nephroureterectomy (NU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) using a hypothetical model.
methodsA total of 155 patients who underwent NU in 15 years were retrospectively evaluated. Three hypothetical models for surveillance intervals were created: 3 (model 1), 6 (model 2) and 12 months (model 3). We superimposed these models on the actual surveillance of each patient and analyzed the observed timing of recurrence. The time from recurrence to scheduled cystoscopy (timeRCS) was defined as the time from recurrence to estimated cystoscopy. The gap risk ratio was calculated based on the average of timeRCS for model 1 at 0-1 year after surgery.
resultsThe median follow-up was 20.5 months. Intravesical recurrence was observed in 63 patients (40.6%). The 3-year intravesical recurrence-free survival rate in patients without a history of bladder cancer before NU was significantly higher than in those with a history of bladder cancer (61% vs. 42%, P = 0.034). The medians of timeRCS for models 1, 2, and 3 were 1.9, 2.9, and 8.4 months, respectively. The gap risk ratios for model 1 at 1-3 years, model 2 at 2-3 years for patients with a history of bladder cancer, and model 2 at 1-3 years for patients without a history of bladder cancer were less than 1.0.
conclusionModel analysis shows that the cystoscopic follow-up interval can be extended depending on the presence or absence of a history of bladder cancer and the time after NU.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39503753What 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.