Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26853170›Full record

ArticleThe Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences2016

Robotic partial nephrectomy for clinical stage T1 tumors: Experience in 42 cases.

Kemal Ener, Abdullah Erdem Canda, Serkan Altinova, Ali Fuat Atmaca, Erdal Alkan, Erem Asil, Muhammet Fuat Ozcan, Ziya Akbulut, Mevlana Derya Balbay

Open access · goldAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kemal EnerDepartment of Urology, Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. Electronic address: kemalener75@yahoo.com.
Abdullah Erdem CandaDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Serkan AltinovaDepartment of Urology, Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Ali Fuat AtmacaDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Erdal AlkanDepartment of Urology, Memorial Sisli Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Erem AsilDepartment of Urology, Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Muhammet Fuat OzcanDepartment of Urology, Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Ziya AkbulutDepartment of Urology, School of Medicine, Yildirim Beyazit University, Ankara Ataturk Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Mevlana Derya BalbayDepartment of Urology, Memorial Sisli Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ankara Atatürk Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi · TRAnkara Yıldırım Beyazıt University · TRMemorial Sisli Hospital · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RAPN) procedures. At two centers, 42 patients underwent RAPN. Radius, Exo/Endophytic, Nearness, Anterior/Posterior, Location (R.E.N.A.L.) nephrometry and PADUA scores of patients were calculated by computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Intra- and perioperative (0-30 days) complications were evaluated using modified Clavien classification. A four-arm da Vinci-S robotic surgical system was used and outcomes were evaluated retrospectively. Mean age of the patients was 52.3 ± 6.5 years. Mean tumor size was 3.1 ± 1.0 (1.4-6.6) cm. R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry and PADUA scores were 6.0 ± 1.5 and 7.5 ± 0.9, respectively. Mean surgical time was 127.7 ± 18.7 minutes and estimated blood loss was 100 ± 18.1 cc. Mean warm ischemia time was 16.0 ± 8.9 (0-30) minutes. Intraoperative complications did not develop in any patient. Median hospital stay was 3.0 (2-6) days. Except for 17 patients, hilar clamping was performed in 25 patients. Histopathology results included 34 renal cell carcinoma (22 clear cell, 7 chromophobe cell, 4 papillary cell, and 1 clear papillary cell). Oncocytoma (n = 4), adenoma (n = 1), fibroadipose tissue (n = 1), papillary epithelial hyperplasia (n = 1), and chronic pyelonephritis (n = 1) were present. Surgical margins were negative in all patients. During a median follow-up period of 15.5 ± 10.9 (3-46) months, neither local recurrence nor distant metastasis was detected. In conclusion, RAPN is a safe, minimally invasive surgical approach, with excellent surgical and oncological outcomes in T1 kidney tumors. Zero ischemia off-clamp RAPN is also safe in selected masses with the advantage of avoiding complete renal ischemia.

Indexed as

AdultAgedCarcinoma, Renal CellFemaleHumansKidney NeoplasmsLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingNephrectomyRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresTreatment OutcomePartial nephrectomyRenal cell carcinomaRobotics

Identifiers

PMID26853170
PMCPMC11916570
OpenAlexW2221265479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.