Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2019
Ureteral pseudodiverticulosis and urothelial cell carcinoma: rethinking the association.
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Morgan Matthew A, Chua Wynne Yuru, Zafar Hanna M, Papanicolaou Nicholas, Ramchandani Parvati
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To compare frequency of new and recurrent urothelial cell carcinoma (UCC) among patients with and without pseudodiverticulosis on imaging.
METHODS: This retrospective case-control study compared all 113 sequential patients with ureteral pseudodiverticulosis on radiographic urography between 1/1/2002 and 12/31/2012. Six patients were lost to follow-up. 107 patients without pseudodiverticulosis were matched by imaging modality, clinical indication, and tumor grade. Known UCC and primary outcome of new or recurrent UCC were determined through pathology on cystoscopy or clinical follow-up.
RESULTS: Nearly half of patients with pseudodiverticulosis had known UCC at the time of imaging (49/107, 46%). Mean cystoscopy follow-up was 7.0 and 4.6 years for pseudodiverticulosis cases with and without known UCC, respectively, and 7.5 and 7.3 years for controls, respectively. Mean clinic follow-up was 7.5 and 6.0 years for pseudodiverticulosis cases with and without known UCC, respectively, and 6.4 and 7.6 years for controls, respectively. Among patients with known UCC at the time of imaging, similar rates of recurrent UCC were demonstrated on follow-up among patients with pseudodiverticulosis (6/49, 12%) and without (7/49, 14%). Among patients with no known history of UCC at the time of imaging, no patients with pseudodiverticulosis developed UCC on follow-up and 5% (3/58) of patients without pseudodiverticulosis developed UCC.
CONCLUSION: Although half of patients with ureteral pseudodiverticulosis have a known diagnosis of UCC, the presence of pseudodiverticulosis did not signify an increased likelihood of developing new or recurrent UCC over the follow-up period.
METHODS: This retrospective case-control study compared all 113 sequential patients with ureteral pseudodiverticulosis on radiographic urography between 1/1/2002 and 12/31/2012. Six patients were lost to follow-up. 107 patients without pseudodiverticulosis were matched by imaging modality, clinical indication, and tumor grade. Known UCC and primary outcome of new or recurrent UCC were determined through pathology on cystoscopy or clinical follow-up.
RESULTS: Nearly half of patients with pseudodiverticulosis had known UCC at the time of imaging (49/107, 46%). Mean cystoscopy follow-up was 7.0 and 4.6 years for pseudodiverticulosis cases with and without known UCC, respectively, and 7.5 and 7.3 years for controls, respectively. Mean clinic follow-up was 7.5 and 6.0 years for pseudodiverticulosis cases with and without known UCC, respectively, and 6.4 and 7.6 years for controls, respectively. Among patients with known UCC at the time of imaging, similar rates of recurrent UCC were demonstrated on follow-up among patients with pseudodiverticulosis (6/49, 12%) and without (7/49, 14%). Among patients with no known history of UCC at the time of imaging, no patients with pseudodiverticulosis developed UCC on follow-up and 5% (3/58) of patients without pseudodiverticulosis developed UCC.
CONCLUSION: Although half of patients with ureteral pseudodiverticulosis have a known diagnosis of UCC, the presence of pseudodiverticulosis did not signify an increased likelihood of developing new or recurrent UCC over the follow-up period.