ArticleInternational journal of surgery (London, England)2026
Fully end-to-end automated bladder segmentation and risk assessment based on bladder morphology features for predicting upper urinary tract dysfunction.
Article in International journal of surgery (London, England), 2026. 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.
- Risk Assessment for Upper Urinary Tract Deterioration in Patients With Neurogenic Bladder: A Retrospective Study Using Interpretable Machine Learning Algorithms.International neurourology journal · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to analyze bladder morphology features for upper urinary tract dysfunction (UUTD) risk assessment and develop a fully end-to-end (E2E) automated segmentation and risk identification algorithm. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective cohort of 604 neurogenic bladder patients undergoing video-urodynamics was analyzed. Bladder regions of interest (ROIs) were manually and automatically segmented. Thirty-six morphology features, including shape, Laplacian of Gaussian histograms, and fractal characteristics, were extracted from ROIs. After LASSO regression, selected predictive features were integrated into machine learning models. Model performance was evaluated via the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), calibration curves, and decision curve analysis.
resultsBased on manually segmented ROI, 28 (77.78%) morphology features exhibited significant differences between different bladder grades. Shape_Perimeter_to_Surface_ratio emerged as the most significant predictor of UUTD (AUC = 0.722, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.674-0.769). The support vector machine (SVM) model demonstrated the highest performance, with an AUC of 0.860 (95% CI: 0.820-0.899) in the training cohort and 0.830 (95% CI: 0.744-0.915) in the test cohort, which was significantly higher than the performance of using single features. However, incorporating clinical information did not further enhance the overall predictive performance of the model. To realize a fully E2E approach, a fully convolutional network with a ResNet101 backbone (FCN-ResNet101) was adopted for automated bladder segmentation (dice similarity coefficient [Dice] = 0.9848, mean intersection over union [mIoU] = 0.9705). Morphology features extracted from automated and manual segmentations showed a strong correlation (all r > 0.90). Similarly, machine learning models were developed, with SVM achieving the highest performance (AUC = 0.843, 95% CI: 0.801-0.885 in the training cohort; AUC = 0.815, 95% CI: 0.729-0.900 in the testing cohort).
conclusionThe bladder morphology features are robust predictors of UUTD. This fully automated, E2E bladder segmentation and UUTD risk prediction model demonstrated superior performance compared to traditional clinical parameters, providing a quantitative and objective tool for early risk assessment. Large-scale, multicenter prospective studies are required to validate its clinical applicability and robustness in the future.
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.