ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2018
First Canadian experience with robotic laparoendoscopic single-site vs. standard laparoscopic living-donor nephrectomy: A prospective comparative study.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of Surgical Techniques in Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Annals of transplantation · 2020Pooled it
- CUAJ is a key partner for academic urology Memories and observations from two Western University old-timers.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Article
- The history of renal transplantation in Canada: A urologic perspective.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2020Article
- Robot-Assisted versus Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy: A Comparison of 250 Cases.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe aimed to compare the outcomes of robotic laparoendoscopic single-site living donor nephrectomy (R-LESS LDN) vs. standard laparoscopic living donor nephrectomy (LLDN).
methodsBetween October 2013 and November 2015, 39 patients were allocated to either standard LLDN (n=25) or R-LESS LDN (n=14). Patient demographics, perioperative outcomes, analgesic requirement, visual analogue scale of pain at postoperative days 1, 3, 7, and 30, and a health-related quality of life and body image questionnaire were prospectively collected.
resultsThere were no significant differences in demographics and intraoperative outcomes between the two cohorts. The R-LESS LDN cohort had lower analgesic requirement (p=0.002) and lower visual pain scores on days 1 and 3 (p=0.001). Additionally, body image and satisfaction scores in the R-LESS group were also superior compared to the LLDN cohort (p=0.008). There was no significant difference in the postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo system. Recipient graft functional outcomes were equivalent.
conclusionsThis is the first evidence that R-LESS LDN is safe and associated with comparable surgical and early functional outcomes compared to LLDN, while pain, donor body image, and satisfaction scores were improved compared to LLDN.
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.