ArticleProstate international2026
Transrectal ultrasound-cystogram versus X-ray-cystogram versus no cystogram: high volume retrospective study.
Article in Prostate international, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: A comparison among X-ray-cystograms (CGs), TRUS-CGs, and no CG to determine the required indwelling time of urinary catheters after radical prostatectomy (RP). Material and methods: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent robotic-assisted RP in our clinic from January 2018 to October 2022. A primary X-ray-CG was performed before the corona pandemic and a TRUS-CG was performed during the corona pandemic. The primary endpoint was the proportion of CGs needed and the proportion of catheter reinsertions. Results: We identified 5,307 patients. Of those, 2,803 (52.8 %) did not initially receive a CG, 1643 (31 %) received an X-ray-CG and 861 (16.2 %) received a TRUS-CG. Patients who first had an X-ray-CG were most likely to receive repeated CGs (8.5 % vs. 6.7 % in TRUS patients vs. 0.2 % in patients without CG, Conclusion: The non-X-ray based method (TRUS-CG) could be safely used to assess the adequacy of the anastomosis, although the catheter reinsertion rate was slightly higher.
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.