ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2019
Does tumour effraction during robotic partial nephrectomy have any impact on recurrence?
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oncological Results After Accidental Tumor Incision During Partial Nephrectomy.European urology open science · 2026Article
- An International Delphi Consensus About Tumor Rupture During Robotic Partial Nephrectomy (Researching UnPredictable TUmor RupturE during Robotic Partial Nephrectomy-The RUPTURE Project).European urology open science · 2025Article
- Does tumor rupture during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy have an impact on mid-term tumor recurrences?Radiology and oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the impact of accidental surgical incision into the tumour (ASIT) on oncological outcomes in patients undergoing RPN for a malignant tumour. MATERIALS AND
methodsA retrospective review of our prospectively maintained database was performed to identify all patients who underwent RPN for a localized RCC between June 2010 and July 2016. We stratified our cohort into two groups according to the presence of an ASIT. Perioperative data were compared between the two groups. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess the variables associated with ASIT. Recurrence-free survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups with the log-rank test.
resultsA total of 234 patients were identified. 32 (14%) ASIT were observed. Patients' characteristics were similar in the two groups. Most of intraoperative outcomes were comparable between the two groups, but patients in the ASIT group had greater EBL (475 vs. 300 mL; p = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, tumour size (p = 0.02), RENAL score (p = 0.02), EBL (p = 0.05) and low surgeon experience (p = 0.03) were all predictive factors of ASIT. 15 (6%) of recurrences were observed over a median follow-up of 36 months. There was no difference in recurrence-free survival between the two groups (p = 0.57).
conclusionsIn our experience, accidental surgical incision into the tumour during RPN was a common event that did not appear to compromise oncological outcome.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30083964What 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.