ReviewFrontiers in pediatrics2019
Current Concepts in Pediatric Robotic Assisted Pyeloplasty.
Review in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Initial experience with combined laparoscopic pyeloplasty with adjunct flexible ureteroscopy for management of ureteropelvic junction obstruction with renal calyceal stones in children: a retrospective study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Article
- Robotic Pediatric Urologic Surgery-Clinical Anesthetic Considerations: A Comprehensive Review.Anesthesiology and pain medicine · 2024Review
- Editorial: Insights in pediatric urology.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
- Pediatric robotic surgery: issues in management-expert consensus from the Italian Society of Pediatric and Neonatal Anesthesia and Intensive Care (SARNePI) and the Italian Society of Pediatric Surgery (SICP).Surgical endoscopy · 2022Article
- Transperitoneal Versus Retroperitoneal Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children. A Multicentre, Prospective Study.European urology open science · 2022Article
- First Pediatric Pyeloplasty Using the SenhanceChildren (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Ensuring safety and feasibility for resection of pediatric benign ovarian tumors by single-port robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery using the da Vinci Xi system.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Article
- Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) in children with complex pelvi-ureteric junction obstruction (PUJO): results of a multicenter European report.World journal of urology · 2021Article
- Minimal Invasive Treatment in Pelvic-Ureteric Junction Obstruction: A Comprehensive Review.Research and reports in urology · 2021Review
- The learning curve for robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: Our initial experience from a single center.Urology annalsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic surgery in pediatric urology has been gaining popularity since its introduction almost two decades ago. Robotic assisted pyeloplasty is the most common robotic procedure performed in pediatric urology. Advances in robotic technology, instrumentation, patient care and surgical expertise have allowed the correction of ureteropelvic junction (UPJ) obstruction in most patients using this minimally invasive technique. The excellent experience with robotic assisted pyeloplasty has challenged other approaches as a new standard for the treatment of UPJ obstruction. In this review, we will describe the technique as it relates to the different robotic platforms, review the surgical experience and compare its results to other surgical approaches. Also, we will discuss patient and parent satisfaction, cost and financial considerations, along with evaluating the future of robotic surgery in the treatment of UPJ obstruction.
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.