ArticleCurrent urology2025
Laparoscopic robotic takedown ureterostomy with extravesical cross-trigonal reimplantation after end cutaneous ureterostomy.
Article in Current urology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The main goal of managing an obstructed megaureter (OMU) is to preserve the function of the affected kidney. To preserve the upper urinary tract, end cutaneous ureterostomy (ECU) seems to be a promising temporizing option. We aimed to evaluate our experience with ECU in patients with primary and secondary OMU and to demonstrate an efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopic takedown ureterostomy and subsequent extravesical ureteric reimplantation. Materials and methods: Retrospective analysis of patients that underwent ECU due to primary or secondary megaureter between 2003 and 2020. Nineteen patients (12 males, 7 females) with a mean age of 4.2 ± 3.5 months (mean ± standard deviation) underwent ECU of 27 renal units. Of those, 11 (57.9%) had primary OMU and 8 (42.1%) had secondary OMU. Undiversion was performed in 16 (84%) out of 19 patients (20 renal units out of 27 [74%]). Results: In the vast majority of the cases, we have observed improvement in the hydronephrosis and renal function after ureterostomy. After reimplantation ultrasonography showed either stable or further improvement in hydronephrosis in 80% of patients. Robot-assisted laparoscopic patients had shorter admission period and indwelling catheter time after the surgery. Conclusions: End cutaneous ureterostomy is a safe and effective temporary procedure for the treatment of progressive primary and secondary megaureters. Robot-assisted laparoscopic takedown of ureterostomy with subsequent reimplantation seems to be a good alternative for undiversion and subsequent reimplantation in these patients.
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.