Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24710511›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

A propensity-score matched comparison of perioperative and early renal functional outcomes of robotic versus open partial nephrectomy.

Zhenjie Wu, Mingmin Li, Le Qu, Huamao Ye, Bing Liu, Qing Yang, Jing Sheng, Liang Xiao, Chen Lv, Bo Yang and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04537247 (A Comparative Study Between Open and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy in Treatment of High Complex Renal Tumors.), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04537247 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

A Comparative Study Between Open and Robotic Partial Nephrectomy in Treatment of High Complex Renal Tumors.

TypeinterventionalSponsorAssiut UniversityRan2021 to 2025Enrolled64ConditionsRenal TumorArmspartial nephrectomy for complex renal tumor
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Zhenjie WuDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Mingmin LiDepartment of Radiology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Le QuDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Huamao YeDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Bing LiuDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Qing YangDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Jing ShengDepartment of Radiology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Liang XiaoDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Chen LvDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Bo YangDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Xu GaoDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Xiaofeng GaoDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Chuanliang XuDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Jianguo HouDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Yinghao SunDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.
Linhui WangDepartment of Urology, Changhai Hospital, Second Military Medical University, Shanghai, P. R. China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare the perioperative and early renal functional outcomes of RPN with OPN for kidney tumors. MATERIALS AND

methodsA total of 209 RPN or OPN patients with availability of preoperative cross-sectional imaging since 2009 at our center were included. To adjust for potential baseline confounders propensity-score matching was performed, which resulted in 94 OPNs matched to 51 RPNs. Perioperative and early renal functional outcomes were compared.

resultsIn propensity-score matched analysis, RPN procedures were well tolerated and resulted in significant decreases in postoperative analgesic time (24 vs. 48 hr, p<0.001) and visual analog pain scale (3 vs. 4, p<0.001). Besides, the RPN patients had a significantly shorter LOS (9 vs. 11 days, p = 0.008) and less EBL (100 vs. 200 ml, p<0.001), but median operative time was significantly longer (229 vs. 182 min, p<0.001). Ischemia time, transfusion rates, complication rates, percentage eGFR decline and CKD upstaging were equivalent after RPN versus OPN. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, RPN patients were less likely to have a prolonged LOS (odds ratio [OR]: 0.409; p = 0.016), while more likely to experience a longer operative time (OR: 4.296; p = 0.001). However, the statistical significance for the protective effect of RPN versus OPN in EBL was not confirmed by examining the risk of EBL≥400 ml (OR: 0.488; p = 0.212).

conclusionsWhen adjusted for potential selection biases, RPN offers comparable perioperative and early renal functional outcomes to those of OPN, with the added advantage of improved postoperative pain control and a shorter LOS.

Indexed as

Kidney Function TestsNephrectomyPerioperative PeriodPropensity ScoreRobotic Surgical ProceduresAdultCohort StudiesFemaleHumansKidney NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedRegression AnalysisTime FactorsTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24710511
PMCPMC3977998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.