Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41527092›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2026

Comparing the clinical accuracy of urine exfoliated cell examination and fluorescence in situ hybridization in the diagnosis of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma.

Chundan Wang, Yufeng Liu, Chunli Zhang, Changliang Wang, Jianjun Wu, Fengchun Xiao, Juan Jin

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC urology, 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

7 authors.

Chundan Wang *Department of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University (Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine), Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China.
Yufeng Liu *Department of Radiology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University (Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine), Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, 310006, China.
Chunli ZhangDepartment of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University (Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine), Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China.
Changliang WangDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University,, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, 310016, China.
Jianjun WuDepartment of Radiology, The Second Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province, 310009, China.
Fengchun XiaoDepartment of Pathology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University (Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine), Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China.
Juan JinDepartment of Nephrology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University (Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine), Hangzhou 310006, Zhejiang Province, China. JJin_zj@163.com.

Funding

the Construction of Key Projects by Zhejiang Provincial Ministry Project No.WKJ-ZJ-2302the General Project of the Medical and Health of Zhejiang Province Grant Number 2021KY833the Huadong Medicine Joint Funds of the Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China Grant No.LHDMZ22H050001The Key project of Basic Scientific Research Operating Funds of Hangzhou Medical College KYZD202002The Key Project of Scientific Research Foundation of Chinese Medicine 2022ZZ002the "Pioneer" and "Leading Goose" R&D Program of Zhejiang 2023C03075
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo compare the effectiveness and clinical accuracy of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and urine exfoliated cytology in the evaluation of upper urinary tract urothelial cell carcinoma (UTUC).

methods60 patients with suspected UUT-UC admitted to our hospital from May 2021 to May 2023 were selected. All patients underwent FISH and urine exfoliated cytology, and a ureteroscopy pathological biopsy was performed. Using pathological biopsy results as the “gold standard”, we analyzed the compliance rate of FISH and urine exfoliated cytology to evaluate UTUC.

resultsAmong 60 patients with suspected UTUC, 52 cases were confirmed positive by pathological biopsy, and 8 cases were negative. The positive detection rate of FISH was 90.38%, which was higher than 71.15% of urine exfoliated cytology (P < 0.05). The coincidence rate of urine exfoliated cytology in assessing high-grade UTUC tumors was 76.67%, and the discrepancy rate was 23.33%; the coincidence rate in assessing low-grade tumors was 63.64%, and the discrepancy rate was 36.36%. The coincidence rate of FISH in assessing high-grade UTUC tumors was 93.33%, and the discrepancy rate was 6.67%; the coincidence rate in assessing low-grade tumors was 86.36%, and the discrepancy rate was 13.64%.

conclusionCompared with urine exfoliated cytology, FISH demonstrated higher diagnostic accuracy for the detection of UTUC and greater accuracy in UTUC classification.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Transitional CellIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceKidney NeoplasmsUreteral NeoplasmsUrineAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedDiagnostic evaluationFluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)Pathological biopsyUpper urinary tract urothelial carcinomaUrine exfoliated cytology

Identifiers

PMID41527092
PMCPMC12874943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.