ReviewArab journal of urology2017
Laparoscopic vs robotic nephroureterectomy: Is it time to re-establish the standard? Evidence from a systematic review.
Review in Arab journal of urology, 2017. 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.
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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted nephroureterectomy for management of upper-tract urothelial carcinoma.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes and Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Nephroureterectomy Approaches in Patients with Upper-Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Article
- Trends, outcomes, and predictors of open conversion during minimally invasive radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a national analysis from 2010 to 2020.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- A new surgical technique of robotic-assisted laparoscopic nephroureterectomy without re-docking in a single position: a single center experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Article
- Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic nephroureterectomy; a systematic review and meta-analysis.BJUI compass · 2023Review
- The nephroureterectomy: a review of technique and current controversies.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Review
- Robot-assisted nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: results from three high-volume robotic surgery institutions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2020Article
- Robotics in urology.Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England · 2018Article
- Surgical and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted versus laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy for upper-tract urothelial carcinoma: A single-center comparative analysis.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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo conduct a systematic review of comparative studies of laparoscopic nephroureterectomy (LNU), the standard management for upper urothelial tumours, and robot-assisted NU (RANU) that has emerged as a viable alternative.
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify all studies reporting on both LNU and RANU for upper urothelial tract tumours.
resultsIn all, 1630 patients were included, of which 838 underwent LNU and 792 RANU. Three studies reported on mean operative time and found it to be less in LNU, with two reporting this to be significant (RANU 298 vs LNU 251 min,
conclusionsThis review suggests these techniques are equivalent in terms of perioperative and oncological performance. Furthermore, there may be a lower overall complication rate, as well as postoperative mortality in the robotic group. Further research in the form of a randomised controlled trial is warranted.
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.