ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2018
Predicting trifecta outcomes after robot-assisted nephron-sparing surgery: Beyond the nephrometry score.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 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.
- Therapeutic and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-assisted Partial NephrectomyIn vivo (Athens, Greece)Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: RENAL nephrometry score (RNS) was devised for deciding the approach for renal tumors. It is increasingly used in predicting perioperative outcomes with variable results. The actual difficulty encountered during surgery depends on a number of other variables. The main purpose of this prospective study was to identify these variables which are not addressed by current RNS. Materials and Methods: Forty-nine patients undergoing robotic nephron sparing surgery from January 2015 onward were included. RNS was calculated from the imaging. Operating surgeon rated each surgery on a Likert scale of 0-4 after the completion of the procedure. The questionnaire was pre-validated in 5 cases before administration. The correlation between the surgeon rating and RNS with perioperative parameters and trifecta outcomes were calculated. Results: Forty-seven percent surgeries were rated easy, and 53.0% were rated as difficult. Surgeries for hilar, posterior location and presence of supernumerary vessels were found to be the a cause of difficulty. Trifecta outcomes were achieved in 37/49 patients (75.5%). The mean rating was 2.580±0.900 in trifecta negative patients while it was 1.410±0.832 in trifecta positive patient (p<0.0001). Surgeon's rating correlated positively with trifecta outcomes (likelihood ratio=15.75, p=0.006). Conclusions: The RNS remained a useful tool for determining renal tumor complexity. The intraoperative difficulty faced by the surgeon can be rated which can better predict perioperative trifecta outcomes. A useful predicting tool can be developed using the two parameters (RNS and surgeon rated difficulty).
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.