ArticleInternational urology and nephrology2026
A novel one-position versus conventional surgical approach for the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a multicenter cohort study based in western China.
Article in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionTraditional radical nephroureterectomy (nRNU) requires repositioning the patient sequentially from the lateral decubitus to the supine position, necessitating a complex surgical workflow. To streamline the procedure, we performed the new entire RNU in a single surgical position by intraoperatively rotating the patient's orientation. This study aimed to evaluate the operational convenience and safety of the nRNU versus cRNU. MATERIALS AND
methodsA controlled trial was conducted at 12 hospitals in western China. Patients undergoing nRNU or cRNU for UTUC between 2013 and 2024 were divided into nRNU group and cRNU group. Baseline features, perioperative and oncologic outcomes, were included.
results221 patients were deemed eligible and were included in the study, of which 78 for cRNU group and 143 for nRNU group. Surgery procedure was finished smoothly without any serious intraoperative complications. The operative time and postoperative hospital stay in nRNU group were shorter than cRNU group [operative time: (214.62 ± 56.77) min vs. (232.05 ± 65.29) min, P = 0.040; postoperative hospital stay: 6 (5, 7) days vs. 7 (6, 8) days, P < 0.001]. However, with regard to indwelling time of the drainage tube, nRNU group required longer time. There were no differences in bladder recurrence and distant metastasis between the two groups.
conclusionsOur findings demonstrate that operative time and postoperative hospital stay were moderately reduced in the nRNU group relative to the cRNU group. This implies that nRNU confers partial advantages through streamlined intraoperative work flow. Tumor outcomes showed no difference between the two groups; the safety of the two groups was comparable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41120777What 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.