ArticleUrology research & practice2026
Radical Nephroureterectomy in the Very Elderly: A Single-Center Experience of Patients Aged ≥85 Years.
Article in Urology research & practice, 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
objectiveThe incidence of upper tract urothelial carcinoma is increasing with population aging, yet evidence regarding radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) in very elderly patients is limited. This study evaluated perioperative outcomes, complications, and oncological results of RNU in patients aged ≥85 years compared with younger counterparts.
methodsA total of 305 patients who underwent RNU between April 2003 and December 2024 at a tertiary institution were retrospectively reviewed. After excluding those with incomplete data (n = 4), non-urothelial histology (n = 8), or undeterminable pathology (n = 9), 284 patients were eligible. Group A included 24 patients aged ≥85 years, range 85-94 years, and group B included 260 patients <85 years, range 46-84 years. Clinicopathological features, operative outcomes, complications, and survival were compared. Temporal trends and restricted mean survival time (RMST) analyses were also performed.
resultsBaseline characteristics were similar (all P > .05). Median laparoscopic operative time was shorter in group A (206 vs. 235 minutes, P = .029). Estimated blood loss, transfusion, and complication rates (10.6% overall; major 2.2%) did not differ (all P > .05). Pathological outcomes were comparable (all P > .05). Adjuvant therapy was less frequent in group A (0% vs. 21.2%, P = .006). Follow-up was 16.3 vs. 35.2, with no differences in survival (all P > .05). The RMST showed shorter survival in group A.
conclusionThe RNU appears feasible in carefully selected patients aged ≥85 years, with perioperative and oncological outcomes broadly comparable to those of younger patients. Chronological age alone should not contraindicate surgery. Restricted mean survival time offers complementary insights into survival estimation in this high-risk population. Cite this article as: Gozu S, Yajima S, Okumura G, et al. Radical nephroureterectomy in the very elderly: A single-center experience of patients aged ≥85 years. Urol Res Pract. 2026, 52, 0125, doi: 10.5152/tud.2026.25125.
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.