Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31413511›Full record

ArticleUrology annals

Utilizing da Vinci

Basmah Al Tinawi, Morris Jessop, Mohamad W Salkini

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Urology annals. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Basmah Al TinawiDepartment of Urology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA.
Morris JessopDepartment of Urology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA.
Mohamad W SalkiniDepartment of Urology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26505, USA.
West Virginia University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionA worldwide mounting in the incidence and prevalence of urolithiasis has been observed. The standard treatment of urologic stone disease (USD) has changed from open surgery to extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), or ureteroscopy depending on the size and location of the stone. We are sharing our experience in utilizing Da Vinci PATIENTS AND

methodsWe reviewed prospectively collected data of 19 patients who underwent robotic-assisted stone surgery (RSS) between January 2010 and March 2018 at our institute for USD involving 22 nephroureteral units.

resultsA total number of 22 RSS were accomplished with no conversion to open. Three patients had bilateral stone and needed to have RSS on each side separately. Eleven RSS were performed on the right. The indications for RSS included as follows: morbid obesity (

conclusionRSS is viable options in the treatment of challenging urologic stone with high success rate and low risk of complication. The need for open stone surgery was eliminated by RSS at our center.

Indexed as

Challenging urinary stoneopen stone surgeryrobotic stone surgerystone-free rate

Identifiers

PMID31413511
PMCPMC6676859
OpenAlexW2958249763

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.