ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Transvaginal route for kidney extraction in laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Arab journal of urology · 2018Review
- Transvaginal specimen removal in minimally invasive surgery.World journal of urology · 2016Review
- Minilaparoscopy in urology: initial results after 32 cases.World journal of urology · 2016Article
- Transvaginal natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in simple nephrectomy.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe aim of this retrospective study was to compare conventional laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy with transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted living-donor nephrectomy in terms of feasibility and reproducibility.
methodsA total of 115 consecutive female patients who underwent laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy (n=70) or transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted living-donor nephrectomy (n=45) were included and compared in terms of operative characteristics, as well as donor and recipient outcomes.
resultsNo significant difference was observed between the laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy and transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted living-donor nephrectomy groups in terms of mean duration of warm and cold ischemia, operation time, length of hospital stay, arterial anastomoses, visual analog scale pain scores, serum creatinine levels, and receiver outcomes, whereas a significantly higher number of venous anastomoses was noted in the laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy group than in the transvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted living-donor nephrectomy group (P=.029).
conclusionsTransvaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery-assisted living-donor nephrectomy seems to be a feasible and reproducible alternative to conventional laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy in female donors provided the viability of the vagina as an organ retrieval route.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.