ArticleAsian journal of urology2025
Sono-urethrogram versus conventional urethrogram in the assessment of urethral stricture disease: A prospective comparative study.
Article in Asian journal of 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The management of urethral stricture disease depends on the location, length of stricture, and associated urethral pathology. These parameters are obtained from preoperative imaging, with conventional urethrogram (retrograde urethrogram and micturating cystourethrogram [RGU/MCU]) being the diagnostic tool of choice despite its many shortcomings. Sono-urethrogram (SUG) is an alternative that addresses most issues of RGU/MCU. Studies comparing RGU/MCU with SUG are limited. With the objective of comparing these two imaging modalities in the evaluation of urethral stricture disease, a prospective study was conducted. Methods: Fifty-six patients suspected of urethral stricture disease on clinical evaluation and confirmed either on RGU/MCU or urethro-cystoscopy were included in the study. SUG was performed by the experienced consultant radiologist who was blinded to the report of RGU/MCU. Findings of RGU/MCU and SUG were compared to intraoperative findings, which served as the reference standard. Results: The median length of the stricture determined intraoperatively was 16.5 mm, by RGU/MCU was 5.8 mm, and by SUG was 13.5 mm. The diagnostic accuracy for determination of the stricture location was 93% for RGU/MCU and 98% for SUG. SUG identified spongiofibrosis in 90% of patients with higher accuracy for the severe degree of spongiofibrosis. Conclusion: SUG has been shown to be more accurate than RGU/MCU in estimating stricture length (both short and intermediate) and localizing the stricture location. Use of SUG in conjunction with RGU/MCU helps in better guidance of stricture management by improving preoperative assessment. Further studies with larger sample sizes are warranted.
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.