Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41363175›Full record

ReviewNeurourology and urodynamics2026

Save the Bladder: Continent Urinary Diversion as Best Practice for Patients With Refractory Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction.

Brian W Chao, Sean P Elliott

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neurourology and urodynamics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Brian W ChaoDepartment of Urology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0862-7652
Sean P ElliottDepartment of Urology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRefractory neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction presents an obstinate clinical problem. For patients who fail nonsurgical measures, we advocate for bladder-sparing, continent urinary diversion as the optimal approach to management.

methodsThe arguments presented herein were informed by a review of the contemporary literature and our longitudinal institutional experience caring for patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction.

resultsBladder-sparing, continent urinary diversion comprises procedures such as bladder augmentation, creation of a continent catheterizable channel, and bladder neck surgeries such as reconstruction, closure, and placement of a compressive sling or artificial sphincter. Such procedures facilitate clean intermittent catheterization, improve continence, and support patients' independent bladder management. These benefits yield quantifiable gains in quality of life, as demonstrated through several contemporary investigations incorporating patient-reported outcomes measures. Moreover, while continent and non-continent diversions are both susceptible to long-term complications, the former can be managed through both surgical and non-surgical means.

conclusionsContinent urinary diversion prioritizes patients' autonomy and quality of life. It should be considered the primary surgical option for patients with refractory neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction.

Indexed as

Lower Urinary Tract SymptomsUrinary BladderUrinary Bladder, NeurogenicUrinary DiversionUrinary Reservoirs, ContinentHumansQuality of LifeTreatment Outcomecontinentintermittent urethral catheterizationneurogenicurinary bladderurinary diversionurinary reservoir

Identifiers

PMID41363175
PMCPMC13686571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.