ArticleBJUI compass2025
Is a second TUR necessary in patients with primary high-grade Ta NMIBC, particularly in the context of initial cases?
Article in BJUI compass, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Reassessing re-TURBT in the modern era: Is it time to move from routine to selective?BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Is a second TUR necessary in patients with primary high-grade Ta NMIBC, particularly in the context of initial cases?BJUI compass · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the clinical significance of a second transurethral resection of the bladder tumour (TURBT) in patients with a primary high-grade (HG) Ta non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC), specifically selected for the initial diagnosis. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analysed 121 patients with primary HG Ta urothelial carcinoma treated at our institution between January 2007 and October 2024. All patients underwent an initial TURBT with the detrusor muscle present in the specimen. Patients were divided into the second TUR group (n = 48) and the non-second TUR group (n = 73). Propensity score matching was performed using age, number of tumours and Bacillus Calmette-Guerin treatment status. Outcomes included the residual tumour rate, recurrence-free survival (RFS), time to progression to muscle invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) and cancer-specific survival (CSS). Results: Residual tumour at the initial resection site was identified in four patients (8.3%) who underwent a second TUR, with two patients (4.2%) being upstaged to T1. The median follow-up was 53 months. There were no significant differences between the two groups in RFS (p = 0.60), time to progression to MIBC (p = 0.63) or CSS (p = 0.18). These findings remained consistent in the matched cohort. Multivariate analysis revealed that a second TUR was not associated with improved RFS. Conclusions: This is the first study to specifically address primary HG Ta bladder cancer, and it suggests that a second TUR may be omitted in selected cases, particularly when the initial resection is complete and the detrusor muscle is adequately sampled. A risk-adapted approach may help reduce unnecessary procedures without compromising oncological safety.
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.