Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27021911›Full record

ReviewCurrent urology reports2016

Current Status of Minimally Invasive Surgery for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Zachary L Smith

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current urology reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Zachary L SmithDivision of Urologic Oncology, Memorial Regional Hospital, Hollywood, FL, USA. zacharyleesmith@gmail.com.
Memorial Regional Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last three decades, the incidence of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has continuously risen, generally attributed to the increased use of cross-sectional imaging across all medical disciplines. Fortunately, despite this rising incidence, the estimated 5-year relative survival rate has improved. This survival improvement likely parallels the stage migration of the last two decades toward an increased incidence of small renal masses (SRMs). However, this survival improvement may be secondary to improved surgical techniques and medical therapies for these malignancies. The increased incidence of SRMs has led to an expected evolution in the treatment of RCC. Minimally invasive surgical applications for the treatment of RCC have gained widespread popularity, and now these approaches to renal malignancies have surpassed open techniques in frequency of utilization. Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted techniques have now been applied to both radical and partial nephrectomy procedures of varying complexity. Additionally, percutaneous ablative procedures have been applied to the treatment of some SRMs, increasing the urologist's armamentarium further. Below, we provide a review of these minimally invasive surgical (MIS) procedures for the treatment of RCC.

Indexed as

Minimally Invasive Surgical ProceduresCarcinoma, Renal CellHumansKidney NeoplasmsLaparoscopyNephrectomyRobotic Surgical ProceduresTime FactorsLaparoscopyMinimally invasive surgeryRenal cell carcinoma

Identifiers

PMID27021911
OpenAlexW2320307062

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.