ReviewTranslational pediatrics2016
Minimally invasive surgery in management of renal tumours in children.
Review in Translational pediatrics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluating Technical Feasibility and Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Excision of Abdominopelvic Solid Tumors in Children: A Retrospective Review.Journal of cancer & allied specialties · 2026Article
- Risk Factors Associated With Unplanned Conversion to Open in Radical and Partial Nephrectomy.Cureus · 2025Article
- Evaluating Technical Feasibility and Surgical Outcomes of Laparoscopic Excision of Abdominopelvic Solid Tumors in Children: A Retrospective Review.Journal of cancer & allied specialties · 2025Article
- Open versus minimally-invasive surgical techniques in pediatric renal tumors: A population-level analysis of in-hospital outcomes.Journal of pediatric urology · 2021Article
- Pediatric minimally invasive surgery for malignant abdominal tumor: Single center experience.Medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in the management of malignant and benign renal tumours in children is gradually becoming more common. Experience is limited and restricted to case reports, retrospective chart reviews and a few cohort studies. There are currently no randomized controlled trials or controlled clinical trials comparing the laparoscopic and open surgical approach for the management of renal tumours in children. MIS may offer the same oncologic outcome in malignant renal tumours whilst providing the advantages associated with MIS in correctly selected cases. The technique for tumour resection has been shown to be feasible in regards to the recommended oncologic principles, although lymph node sampling can be inadequate in some cases. Preliminary reports do not show an increased risk of tumour rupture or inferior oncologic outcomes after MIS. However, the sample size remains small and duration of follow-up inadequate to draw any firm conclusions. Implementation of MIS is lacking in the protocols of the major study groups, and standardized recommendations for the indications and contra-indications remain undefined. The objective of this article is to present a review of the literature on the role of MIS in the management of renal tumours in children, with the main focus on Wilms' tumour (WT). Further studies on MIS in renal tumours are required to evaluate the incidence of oncological complications such as complete tumour resection and intra-operative tumour spillage. A long-term follow-up of patients managed by MIS is essential to compare recurrence rates and overall survival rates.
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.