Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25966662›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2015

Comparison of 30-day perioperative outcomes in adults undergoing open versus minimally invasive pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction: analysis of 593 patients in a prospective national database.

Julian Hanske, Alejandro Sanchez, Marianne Schmid, Christian P Meyer, Firas Abdollah, Florian Roghmann, Adam S Feldman, Adam S Kibel, Jesse D Sammon, Joachim Noldus and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Laparoscopic Disconnected Pyeloplasty to Treat Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction (UPJO) in Children.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Julian HanskeDivision of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis Street, ASB II-3, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. j.hanske@gmx.de.
Alejandro SanchezDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. asanchez6@partners.org.
Marianne SchmidDivision of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis Street, ASB II-3, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. dr.marianne.schmid@gmail.com.
Christian P MeyerDivision of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis Street, ASB II-3, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. christian.p.meyer@gmail.com.
Firas AbdollahVattikuti Urology Institute Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Henry Ford Health System, 2799 W Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI, 48202-2689, USA. firas.abdollah@gmail.com.
Florian RoghmannDepartment of Urology, Marien Hospital, Ruhr-University Bochum, Widumer Strasse 8, 44627, Herne, Germany. f.roghmann@gmail.com.
Adam S FeldmanDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street, Boston, MA, 02114, USA. afeldman@partners.org.
Adam S KibelDivision of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis Street, ASB II-3, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. akibel@partners.org.
Jesse D SammonVattikuti Urology Institute Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Henry Ford Health System, 2799 W Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI, 48202-2689, USA. jsammon79@gmail.com.
Joachim NoldusDepartment of Urology, Marien Hospital, Ruhr-University Bochum, Widumer Strasse 8, 44627, Herne, Germany. joachim.noldus@marienhospital-herne.de.
Quoc-Dien TrinhDivision of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis Street, ASB II-3, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. trinh.qd@gmail.com.
Jairam R EswaraDivision of Urologic Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 45 Francis Street, ASB II-3, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. jeswara@partners.org.
Harvard University · USHenry Ford Health System · USMassachusetts General Hospital · USRuhr University Bochum · DEUniversity Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe surgical correction of ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) is indicated to prevent progression to chronic renal insufficiency. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has become increasingly popular as an approach to UPJO correction. We compared the perioperative outcomes between minimally invasive (MIP) and open pyeloplasty (OP) in the adult population.

methodsThe current study was performed using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Patients were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes for pyeloplasty between 2005 and 2012, and were stratified according to either MIS or open approach. Patients with a diagnosis of malignant neoplasm of the kidney were excluded. Following exclusions, 593 patients remained for analysis. Primary outcomes of interest were overall perioperative complications, need for transfusions, re-intervention rate, prolonged operation time (pOT), prolonged length of stay (pLOS), readmission and mortality within 30 days of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the association between preoperative outcomes and surgical approach.

resultsIn this study, 423 (71.3 %) patients underwent MIP and 170 (28.7 %) underwent OP. Patients who underwent MIP had a decreased risk of wound [Odds ratio (OR) 0.06, p < 0.009] and overall complications (OR 0.21, p < 0.001), transfusions (OR 0.04, p = 0.004) and pLOS [pLOS (OR 0.08, p < 0.001)]. Conversely, MIP was associated with an increased likelihood of pOT (OR 2.26, p = 0.002).

conclusionAdults with UPJO undergoing MIP have a lower risk of overall complications, transfusions and pLOS compared to OP. Further studies are needed to determine whether these benefits offset the increase in expenditures, related to longer operative time and costs of disposables.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyAdolescentAdultAgedCohort StudiesDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansKidney PelvisMaleMiddle AgedQuality ImprovementTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesUreteral ObstructionYoung AdultAdultMinimally invasiveNSQIPPyeloplastyUreteropelvic junction obstruction

Identifiers

PMID25966662
OpenAlexW327544175

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.