ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2018
[Standard surgery for small renal masses (<4 cm)].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A retrospective study of open and endoscopic nephron sparing surgery in the treatment of complex renal tumors.Pakistan journal of medical sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral new treatment strategies have emerged in the treatment of small renal masses (<4 cm in diameter). Active surveillance and ablative techniques have been introduced but it remains unclear which patients will benefit the most from these new treatment options. A surgical approach remains standard of care. In recent decades, radical nephrectomy has been replaced by nephron-sparing surgery for the management of small renal masses.
resultsIn addition to the open partial nephrectomy, which is considered the standard approach, the number of surgeries performed using minimally invasive techniques is increasing. Recent data show that there might be some benefits such as less blood loss. The disadvantages shown by laparoscopic partial nephrectomy such as prolonged warm ischemia, longer operation times, and postoperative renal impairment might be negligible for the robotic approach. Therefore, current guidelines allow these approaches in addition to open partial nephrectomy if sufficient surgical expertise is given.
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.