ArticleCase reports in urology2026
Laparoscopic Retroperitoneal Repair of a Retrocaval Ureter: A Case Report and Video Demonstration.
Article in Case reports in urology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Laparoscopic Retroperitoneal Repair of a Retrocaval Ureter: A Case Report and Video Demonstration.Case reports in urology · 2026Article
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
Background: Retrocaval ureter is an uncommon congenital condition caused by abnormal development of the inferior vena cava. The resulting posterior displacement of the ureter may produce compression, impaired urinary drainage, and hydronephrosis. Case Presentation: A 35-year-old man was referred following the detection of a right-sided Type I retrocaval ureter during evaluation of right renal colic. Laboratory investigations and physical examination were unremarkable. Computed tomography urography and retrograde pyelography demonstrated the characteristic abnormal ureteral course with associated proximal obstruction. The patient underwent laparoscopic retroperitoneal mobilization, transposition, and reconstruction of the ureter. The operative steps are presented in an accompanying video. Recovery was uncomplicated, and follow-up imaging demonstrated resolution of the obstruction. Conclusion: Laparoscopic retroperitoneal reconstruction provides direct access to the affected ureter while avoiding entry into the peritoneal cavity. In appropriately selected patients and experienced hands, it represents an effective minimally invasive option for the treatment of retrocaval ureter.
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.