ReviewBJUI compass2024
Contemporary status of diagnostic endoluminal ultrasound and optical coherence tomography in the ureter.
Review in BJUI compass, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Enhanced Endoscopic Imaging Technologies in Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Tumors: Implications for Kidney-Sparing Surgery-A Narrative Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Erratum.BJUI compass · 2024Article
- Contemporary status of diagnostic endoluminal ultrasound and optical coherence tomography in the ureter.BJUI compass · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2024
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate via a review of published literature, the efficacy of endoluminal ultrasound (ELUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the following ureteric diseases: urolithiasis, upper tract urothelial carcinoma, stricture disease and pelvic-ureteric junction obstruction (PUJO). Patients and methods: Ureteric high-frequency ELUS provides 360° imaging, to a depth of 20 mm, and has been demonstrated to assess ureteric stricture length, degree of fibrosis and aetiology. OCT produces high-quality images with a penetration depth of 2 mm. ELUS has proven to be useful at the time of endopyelotomy for PUJO as it can identify crossing vessels, some not detectable on CT angiography, allowing the urologist to avoid these when making their incision. Ureteric ELUS may be utilised for submucosal ureteric stones as they are highly visible. Endoluminal ultrasound may be deployed in the case of known sub-mucosal urolithiasis when the ureter appears stone-free. It may help identify sub-mucosal stones or stones within diverticulum. Results: Endoluminal ultrasound has been analysed for its use in determining muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma of the ureter. The PPV for ≥pT2 was only 16.7% in one study of six patients with MIBC and 76.2% in 21 patients with <pT2 disease. Analysis of OCT for staging UTUC during ureteroscopy and biopsy demonstrated sensitivity for tumour invasion of 100% and specificity of 92%, 83% of lesion staging matched with histological analysis. Imaging analysis did not match histology in three patients with large exophytic tumours that exceeded the OCT depth penetration. Due to its superficial penetration, OCT cannot reliably stage large tumours. Conclusions: Ureteric ELUS has been reported to be a useful tool in endopyelotomy, urolithiasis and stricture disease. The staging of ureteric urothelial carcinoma remains unsatisfactory with current imaging techniques and biopsy methods, and, based on the current literature, ELUS does not appear to have a strong enough PPV to determine muscle invasion. Ureteric OCT may be a useful tool in the future staging of upper tract urothelial carcinoma, particularly in differentiating the stage of small tumours. Further studies are needed in this area.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.