Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42682041›Full record

ReviewThe Canadian journal of urology2026

Artificial intelligence advances in cystoscopy and imaging for bladder cancer: a narrative review.

Usman Khalid, Nikhil Shah, Rajesh Kavia, Deepak Batura

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in The Canadian journal of 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

4 authors.

Usman KhalidFaculty of Medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Nikhil ShahFaculty of Medicine, Medical University of Plovdiv, Plovdiv, Bulgaria.
Rajesh KaviaDepartment of Urology, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow, London, UK.
Deepak BaturaDepartment of Urology, London North West University Healthcare NHS Trust, Watford Road, Harrow, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bladder cancer (BCa) diagnosis relies heavily on cystoscopy and imaging. Both have limited sensitivity and accuracy, particularly for muscle-invasive disease. Artificial intelligence (AI) has emerged as a promising tool for improving detection, grading, and staging by extracting imaging features that exceed human perception. We conducted a narrative review of peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between 2015 and 2025. We identified 75 articles and synthesized data from 35 key studies retrieved via PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and Embase. Data were synthesized narratively, emphasizing diagnostic performance, clinical relevance, and study limitations. In cystoscopy, AI models achieved high accuracy in tumour detection and grading, including carcinoma in situ, and in some studies reduced missed lesions by >20% compared with expert urologists; CystoNet-T reported an average precision of 91.4%. Performance varied across studies, with inconsistencies driven by methodological factors: endoscopic acquisition conditions (illumination quality; white-light vs. enhanced imaging), variation in ground truth and annotation (histopathology vs. expert-labelled frames), dataset size and class imbalance, model architecture and preprocessing pipelines, and validation strategy (internal splits vs. external testing). Most evidence remains limited by retrospective, single-center datasets, which restrict generalizability. In imaging, AI applications showed modality-dependent performance. CT-based radiomic and deep-learning models demonstrated the most consistent improvements for grading, staging, and recurrence prediction across several studies. MRI and radiogenomic models demonstrated proof-of-concept associations between imaging features and molecular profiles. However, clinical readiness is limited by small cohorts and a lack of prospective validation. Results were also affected by scanner heterogeneity and reader dependence. Evidence for PET/CT remains sparse and preliminary. Many approaches outperformed conventional clinical models, including a vision transformer (ViT)-based MRI model for muscle invasiveness prediction (AUC = 0.872). Methodological heterogeneity restricted generalisability. AI shows potential to reduce diagnostic variability and improve initial treatment planning in BCa. Nonetheless, prospective multicentre trials with standardised methodology are essential before clinical integration. In parallel, regulatory approval of AI as medical software, real-time workflow integration within cystoscopy suites and radiology systems, data governance and patient privacy, and ongoing post-deployment performance monitoring must be addressed to ensure safe and effective clinical use.

Indexed as

Artificial IntelligenceCystoscopyUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsHumansartificial intelligenceBladder cancercystoscopyimagingmachine learning

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.