ArticleBMC medical imaging2026
Integrating clinical, laboratory and quantitative CT features for predicting split renal function in urinary tract obstruction.
Article in BMC medical imaging, 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
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUrinary tract obstruction (UTO) can lead to progressive renal impairment, making accurate evaluation of split renal function (SRF) essential for clinical decision-making. Although radionuclide renal dynamic scintigraphy remains the gold standard for SRF assessment, its clinical application is constrained by procedural complexity, limited availability, and sensitivity to anatomical variations. Thus, there is a clinical need for simpler, reliable, and noninvasive alternative approaches. This study aimed to develop and validate a predictive model for SRF grading by integrating clinical variables, laboratory parameters, and quantitative contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) features in patients with UTO.
methodsA retrospective cohort of 78 patients with UTO (150 kidneys) was analyzed. Based on split renal glomerular filtration rate (GFR) determined using the Gates method, kidneys were categorized into normal, mild-to-moderate impairment, and severe impairment groups. Clinical variables, laboratory parameters, and quantitative CECT features were collected. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors and construct SRF grading models. Model performance was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and decision curve analysis (DCA).
resultsIn Task 1 (normal vs. abnormal) and Task 2 (normal vs. mild-to-moderate), age was the key univariate predictor, while hemoglobin (Hb) and renal cortical thickness (Rc) were identified as independent predictors in the laboratory-based and CECT-based multivariate models, respectively. For Task 1, the Combined model [Clinical predictor (Age) + Laboratory model (Hb-based) + CECT model (Rc-based)] achieved the highest diagnostic performance (AUC = 0.890); for Task 2, the optimal model was [Clinical predictor (Age) + CECT model (Rc-based)] (AUC = 0.810). For Task 3 (mild-to-moderate vs. severe), Hb was the strongest univariate predictor, and Rc was the sole independent predictor in the CECT-based multivariate model. The highest diagnostic accuracy for Task 3 was achieved by the combined Laboratory predictor (Hb) + CECT model (Rc-based), with an AUC of 0.970.
conclusionThe CECT model (Rc-based) serves as a crucial imaging biomarker for evaluating SRF impairment in patients with UTO. Task-specific models combining the CECT model (Rc-based) with a clinical predictor (Age) and laboratory information—either as a univariable predictor (Hb) or as a multivariable laboratory model (Hb-based)—showed superior predictive performance. This integrated, noninvasive strategy may serve as a useful adjunct to radionuclide imaging for individualized SRF assessment, pending prospective validation.
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.