SynthesisBMC urology2026
Crafting the graft: an umbrella review of long-term outcomes and complications for various graft usage in urethral reconstruction.
Synthesis 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.
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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The optimal graft choice for urethral reconstruction remains debated. This umbrella review synthesised evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses on graft materials, focusing on success, complications, and long-term outcomes. PubMed and Scopus were searched to March 2025 for reviews of patients undergoing graft-based urethral reconstruction. Eligible studies reported outcomes including success, donor-site morbidity, complications, stricture recurrence, stricture-free survival, operative efficiency, and postoperative parameters. GRADE assessed certainty, with analyses stratified by graft type and, where available, by sex or indication. Twelve reviews (2012–2025) covering 9,829 patients met criteria. Ten examined males—nine adults (three mixed etiologies, others strictures) and one pediatric hypospadias. Two included both sexes, with female cases limited to anterior strictures. Buccal mucosa grafts (BMG) were most studied, showing success > 80%. Meta-analyses found no significant difference between BMG and penile skin grafts (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.55–1.23, I²=88%) or lingual mucosa grafts (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.79–1.77, I²=63%). Low review quality was found in studies involving females, children, and some males, due to small sample sizes, risk of bias, lack of PROSPERO registration, and inconsistencies with meta-analysis methods, resulting in low GRADE certainty. BMG remains most effective, but evidence for women and children is scarce. Future studies should prioritise sex-stratified data, scoping reviews, and clinical algorithms.
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.