Impact of extended vs standard lymph node dissection on overall survival among patients with urothelial cancer of the bladder: Time to death from bladder cancer
Impact of extended showed no clear difference in time to death from bladder cancer (absolute effect size estimates… compared with standard lymph node dissection on overall survival among patients… (low certainty).
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Impact of extended vs standard lymph node dissection on overall survival among patients with urothelial cancer of the bladder Time to death from bladder cancer (absolute effect size estimates based on death rate at 5 years) · Partcipants with bladder cancer undergoing radical cystectomy (male n = 314, female n = 87; age (interquartile range)… Impact of extended showed no clear difference in time to death from bladder cancer (absolute effect size estimates… compared with standard lymph node dissection on overall survival among patients… (low certainty). Extended versus standard lymph node dissection for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder in patients… (2019) · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | HR 0.7 [0.45, 1.07] | 1 study · 401 participants | Low |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Extended versus standard lymph node dissection for urothelial carcinoma of the bladder in patients undergoing radical cystectomy 2019 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only | Not reported | list not extracted yet | Not assessed |
Studies behind the findings
None of these reviews ties its included studies to this outcome in the data here. Cochrane reviews and reviews with headline outcomes only do not list their studies yet.
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.