En-bloc resection: Evidence and uncertainty

Re: Comparative effectiveness of en-bloc resection techniques vs. conventional transurethral resection for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.9518

Keywords:

bladder tumor, en bloc resection, meta-analysis, GRADE, risk of bias

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2026-01-27

How to Cite

Gautier, M., Dahm, P., & Maisch, P. (2026). En-bloc resection: Evidence and uncertainty : Re: Comparative effectiveness of en-bloc resection techniques vs. conventional transurethral resection for non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Canadian Urological Association Journal, 20(2), E80–1. https://doi.org/10.5489/cuaj.9518

Issue

Vol. 20 No. 2 (2026): CUAJ February

Section

Letters

License

You, the Author(s), assign your copyright in and to the Article to the Canadian Urological Association. This means that you may not, without the prior written permission of the CUA:

  • Post the Article on any Web site
  • Translate or authorize a translation of the Article
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce the Article, in any format, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so
  • Copy or otherwise reproduce portions of the Article, including tables and figures, beyond what is permitted under Canadian copyright law, or authorize others to do so.

The CUA encourages use for non-commercial educational purposes and will not unreasonably deny any such permission request.

You retain your moral rights in and to the Article. This means that the CUA may not assert its copyright in such a way that would negatively reflect on your reputation or your right to be associated with the Article.

The CUA also requires you to warrant the following:

  • That you are the Author(s) and sole owner(s), that the Article is original and unpublished and that you have not previously assigned copyright or granted a licence to any other third party;
  • That all individuals who have made a substantive contribution to the article are acknowledged;
  • That the Article does not infringe any proprietary right of any third party and that you have received the permissions necessary to include the work of others in the Article; and
  • That the Article does not libel or violate the privacy rights of any third party.