ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2025
Diagnostic efficacy of combined high- and low-frequency ultrasound in post-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation ureteral obstruction in leukemia patients.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2025. 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.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of high- and low-frequency ultrasound (H&LFUS) in the imaging of post-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (post-HSCT) ureteral obstruction in leukemia patients.
methodsA total of 103 patients who received HSCT for leukemia were included in this retrospective study. Patients underwent examinations using high-frequency ultrasound (HFUS), low-frequency ultrasound (LFUS), and the combined use of H&LFUS approach. Baseline data, clinical laboratory parameters, and clinical parameters were compared among the groups. Ultrasound findings and diagnostic sensitivity, specificity and accuracy were also analyzed to assess the diagnostic value of the imaging modalities.
resultsThe investigation demonstrated no statistically significant distinctions in demographic, baseline, and clinical parameters among the HFUS group, LFUS group, and H&LFUS group. Nonetheless, notable differences emerged in the detection rates of specific ultrasound abnormalities, encompassing ureteral dilatation, wall thickening, urine flow obstruction, hydronephrosis, bladder wall thickening, and renal masses. Regarding diagnostic performance metrics, H&LFUS approach exhibited superior efficacy across sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy, registering rates of 91.43%, 88.57%, and 90%, respectively, surpassing those of the individual HFUS and LFUS methodologies.
conclusionThe amalgamation of H&LFUS techniques manifests as a formidable diagnostic modality, characterized by heightened sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39614939What 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.