Talk:Ureter

Ureter has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: September 1, 2020. (Reviewed version).

Anatomy: Gross Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Muscles of the ureter

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

this article needs to go into far deeper detail about the muscles of the ureters. let's start wth what muscles are in the ureter

Gringo300 08:42, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the article does describe the two helically arranged muscle layers. They are unnamed, being just the ureteric smooth muscle. They are not very remarkable either, except to those with a specialised interest (like me - they were the subject of my doctorate thesis!) and some urologists interested in the medical management of ureteric colic. Jfbcubed 22:30, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why has someone posted a picture of a kidney on the ureter page? There used to be a anatomic drawing (?from Gray's) of a ureter in cross-section - that made more sense. This picture is like showing a map of Europe to illustrate Gibraltar. It's there, sure, but only in the corner and the only use of the picture is to show what it's connected to. Jfbcubed 19:51, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Urerter

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I have a daughter who is in her fourth month of pregnancy and the the procedure has caused even greater pain... my question is will she continue to hurt as great throughout the rest of the pregnancy and what are risk they may apply further into time? Thanks

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merger proposals

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Proposed merge with Ureteropelvic junction

Ureter Tom (LT) (talk) 06:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC) Done[reply]

Proposed merge with Orifice of ureter

Needlessly fragmented to have these two tiny articles on the beginning and end of the ureter separated. Tom (LT) (talk) 06:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ureter/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs) 16:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking up this review Dunkleosteus77. I'll try and address what I can now, and weightier comments after we're finished at prostate. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunkleosteus77 just checking up on progress. I have responded to your concerns below. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:39, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunkleosteus77 responded to your new concerns. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunkleosteus77 I will respond to your concerns below. I'm very appreciative of the time you are giving me to respond and thoroughness. However, could I please ask you for either a full review, or an indication of where your review is at and expects to be at time-wise? This piecemeal approach results in a few relatively small concerns delivered weekly and I would probably be able to address most concerns in one or two sittings if I had a full review in front of me. --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunkleosteus77 done, thanks for replying so promptly. One question at the end for you, and I have boxed some old review content. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunkleosteus77, have finally got to the animals query. Have a look in the collapsed section and let me know if you have any remaining issues.--Tom (LT) (talk) 06:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dunkleisteus77

Addressed

"in the more distal one-third to assist with peristalsis" would be helpful to say that this is the third closest to the bladder, and to define peristalsis User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 16:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The entirety of the 2nd paragraph needs to be redone for grammar User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 16:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Woah. In my head that was not what the prose was like. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"and only since the development of medical imaging in the 1900s that techniques such as X-ray, CT and ultrasound have been able to view the ureters." this is sort of obvious. It'd be better if you just said "they are imaged using x-ray, CT, ultrasound, and uteroscopy" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 16:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done it is kind of obvious, but the phrasing is to flow better with the previous statement about history. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The way it's worded makes it sound like the fact that medical imaging wasn't invented until the 20th century is at the crux of understanding the history of the ureter User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:36, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Partly done. The full paragraph is: The ureters have been identified for at least two thousand years; with the word ureter stemming from the stem uro- relating to urinating and seen in written records since at least the time of Hippocrates. It is however only since the 1500s that the term "ureter" has been consistently used to refer to the modern structure; and only since the development of medical imaging in the 1900s that techniques such as X-ray, CT and ultrasound have been able to view the ureters. Visualising in a live person is very important and quite distinct from cadaveric specimens. Reference to the time point is both useful to get an idea of the scale of history, and also mirrors the construction of the first two sentences. I will add a statement about uteroscopy. I think this is a stylistic issue that should not block nomination per the six criteria which you review against (WP:GACR); you are welcome to seek a second opinion. --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You got a lot of citation needed tags and I see a note in the Structure section  which make me think this isn't near the GA mark yet User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 16:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Partly done Here, "a lot of" means three. I've removed one - that citation is at the end of the sentence. I should be able to get to both others within a week or so; it is up to you to judge regarding comprehensiveness, however one paragraph that is shorter and will be expanded within the timeframe of the review I don't think should fail on this criteria. --Tom (LT) (talk) 08:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Done let me know what you think. I'm always worried when I mix singular and plural forms (as there is a left and a right ureter) that the end product is understandable. --Tom (LT) (talk) 02:05, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What is the adventitia? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 17:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The outer fibrous layer of a vessel. Linked. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"The ureter has a blood supply which varies along its course" this sounds like different parts of the ureter receive different quantities of blood, but the proceeding text talks about different parts of the ureter sourcing blood from different arteries User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 17:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Reworded for clarity. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be confusing semi colons with parentheses sometimes; "the gonadal arteries being the testicular artery in men and the ovarian artery in women" should be parentheses User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 17:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- These are two related but independent clauses, which is the purpose of a semi-colon. I do not agree that this is incorrect. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Those vessels closer to the kidney drain into renal collecting vessels; into the lateral aortic nodes near the gonadal vessels" I don't understand. Is the part after the semi colon supposed to explain/elaborate the stuff before the semi colon? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 17:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh dear, I agree that this use is incorrect. Either a grammatical error on my part (how embarrassing!) or a result of chopping and changing during article creation. I've fleshed out the text here, so it should make more sense. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
You should specify that T9-12, L1, and S2-4 refer to different vertebral segments User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 17:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- These relate to the nerve roots emerging from that vertebral segment. I have linked nerve roots to clarify. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
What is an outpuching? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- it's an "outpouching" written by someone who can't spell. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"One reason is that the natural history of the majority of vesicoureteral reflux is to improve without any intervention at all" it'd be less confusing to say, "One reason is because vesicoureteral reflux more often than not resolves itself" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done much better phrasing, good suggestion. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"it generally involves reattaching the ureters to the bladder" when were the ureters disconnected? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done clarified. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"It is unclear if there is a role of surgery in vesicoureteral reflux" I don't understand. Are you trying to say one possibly effect of some kind of bladder-related surgery could result in reflux, or that it's unclear if surgery can fix reflux? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 02:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done must have been a hangover from before. The review article used is more up to date and in a more respectived medical journal, so I have removed that ambiguous statement. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"These are considered indications for surgery" clearer if you said "This would require surgical correction" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done clarified. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Why would narrowing the ureter be a solution for a narrow ureter? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done widened. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Haematuria is wikilinked multiple times User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done linked twice; second instance has been removed. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"a physical medical examination may be otherwise normal, except in late disease" would be clearer if you said "symptoms may not be present until a late stage of the disease" User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done clarified Symptoms can be absent, and also an examination (eg. an abdominal examination) may have no findings - separate concepts so both need a mention. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Ureteral cancer is most often due to cancer of the cells lining the ureter" you already said it's most common in the urothelium User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Not done Cancer can occur of other cells, eg squamous cell cancer, metastases, so these statements are distinct and convey different information. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
First sentence of Injury is a fragment User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done fixed. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"0.2 per 1,000" aren't these ratios generally given in whole numbers (so 2 per 10,000) User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done fixed this and the subsequent number for consistency. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The lead says the ureters are 25–30 cm long, but Structure says 20–30 cm
- Done fixed. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I assume the ureter develops differently in a lot of different amniote groups. Why do you only mention marsupials? User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Question: I may need some help here. First is that I don't have enough familiarity with zoology to confidently reword amniotes to something more easy to understand, but ideally the lay terms would also be used. If you could insert what that means, I'd be very grateful. Secondly is that the fact is that the ureters are a pretty straightforward structure, connecting kidneys to bladders, so it's difficult to find a reliable source that describes specifically which animals its in. Thirdly is that because it's such a straightforward structure I don't really have much to say about it in other animals. I'd value your opinion on this point.--Tom (LT) (talk) 23:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have detailed knowledge on the ureters of the animal kingdom, but I know that among amniotes (birds, reptiles, and mammals), birds and some reptiles do not have bladders, and I'm not sure what that means for ureters. Since you should also be talking about fish and amphibians, I suggest you say simply "animals. This should give you a good crash course into animal ureters you can bounce off of User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 03:14, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done and found an up-to-date, reliable source. Thanks for pushing me on this one. --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:23, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"The duct that connects the kidney to excrete urine in these animals is the ureter" this seems to imply that all non-human amniotes lack a bladder (unless you're including a bladder where present on the path from the kidneys to the urethra/cloaca). Also, if it's not too much trouble, it might be good to specifically state that sharks and amphibians don't have ureters and use the mesonephric duct to connect the kidney to the cloaca. Looking up fish, I think that at least some fish do indeed have a ureter(s?) User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk 14:24, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Dunkleosteus77 I think the phrasing now is very clear. It's present in amniotes, who have metanephric-derived kidneys, where the duct is called the ureter, and it connects to the bladder: The structure specifically called the ureter is present in amniotes, meaning mammals, birds and reptiles.[24] These animals possess an adult kidney derived from the metanephros.[24] The duct that connects the kidney to excrete urine in these animals is the ureter.[24] It connects to the urinary bladder, from whence urine leaves via the urethra

Based on that source, although there are ducts which connect kidneys to excrete matter in other animals, because it is not derived from the metanephric duct, it is not called the ureter. With regard to other facts above, I feel that in the case less is more. I sometimes encounter situations in the anatomy space where there are lots of 'comparative type' statements as you request and, in my opinion, they often make the text more confusing, which is why I haven't gone into more detail about other types of kidneys, the role of the bladder, etc. --Tom (LT) (talk) 01:00, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]