ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2026
A multicenter retrospective study of 108 men with urethral hemangioma.
Article in Translational andrology and 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Male urethral hemangioma is a rare but highly under-recognized cause of sex-related hematuria and hematospermia. Existing evidence is limited to small case series. This study aimed to characterize the clinical features and long-term outcomes of male urethral hemangioma treated with cystourethroscopy followed by immediate endoscopic treatment, and to evaluate risk factors for recurrence and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Methods: This retrospective multicentered cohort study included 108 men with urethral hemangioma from Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University and Army Medical Center from 2014 to 2025 with at least 3-month follow-up. Baseline characteristics, lesion location, perioperative variables, and follow-up data were collected. PRO failure was defined as any of: patient global impression of change as no change or worse, overall satisfaction ≤7 (out of 10), or fear-driven avoidance of sexual activity over the past 3 months. Conventional logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with PRO failure, and Firth penalized Cox proportional regression was applied to explore risk factors for recurrence. Results: Following cystourethroscopy and immediate endoscopic surgery, symptoms resolved within 6 weeks in 100% of patients, recurrence occurred in 8 (7.4%) cases with a median of 55 months follow-up. PRO failure occurred in 17 (15.7%) cases and was independently associated with baseline lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) [odds ratio 3.4 (1.089, 11.114), P=0.04], but not with age (P=0.12) or recurrence (P=0.41). Multiple lesions [hazard ratio 5.732 (1.044, 31.468), P=0.04] were independently associated with recurrence in Firth regression, whereas typical versus atypical location was not (P=0.31). Conclusions: Cystourethroscopy followed by immediate endoscopic treatment is a safe and effective one-step diagnostic-therapeutic strategy with low long-term recurrence and high patient satisfaction. Baseline LUTS and lesion multiplicity offer clinically relevant risk stratification for PROs and recurrence.
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.