Observational studyMedicine2019
Evaluation of the clinical value of retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty in the treatment of ureteropelvic junction obstruction in infants: A single-center experience involving 22 consecutive patients.
Observational study in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Meta-Analysis of the Efficacy of Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction via Retroperitoneal and Transperitoneal Approaches.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2021Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retroperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RLP) is 1 method for treating ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in children, but reports are more common in children than in infants younger than 2 years old. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical value of RLP for infants with UPJO.From January 2015 to December 2017, a retrospective analysis of 22 infants aged 2 to 24 (11.95 ± 6.00) months with UPJO who were treated with RLP in our hospital was performed. During the same period, 14 infants who underwent conventional transperitoneal laparoscopic pyeloplasty (TLP) were compared with those who underwent RLP. Postoperative recovery and complications, including bleeding, infection, urinary leakage and anastomotic stenosis, postoperative resumption of oral feeding, postoperative hospitalization time and surgical success rate were evaluated. Drainage and function were assessed with isotope scan at 6 months and later during the yearly follow-up and by intravenous urography (IVU) and mercaptoacetyltriglycine (MAG3) renography.Both groups underwent successful surgery. The operative time in the RLP group was 88 to 205 (120.59 ± 24.59) min, and there was no significant difference compared with the TLP group (P = .767). The estimated intraoperative blood loss was 2 to 10 (3.75 ± 1.59) ml, which was not significantly different between the 2 groups (P = .386). In the RLP group, the mean postoperative resumption of oral feeding was faster than that in the TLP group (3.55 ± 0.74 vs 5.50 ± 0.85 hour, P < .001), and the postoperative hospitalization time was shorter in the TLP group than in the RLP group (6.59 ± 0.50 vs 7.07 ± 0.47 day, P = .007 < .05). Follow-up lasted from 6 months to 3 years, and there was a significant reduction in postoperative hydronephrosis in both groups (P < .05, respectively).RLP is a safe procedure for infants. This procedure is associated with relatively little trauma, a quick recovery and good cosmetic effects. RLP also has the advantages of relatively little interference with the abdominal cavity and sufficient operating space; thus, this technique is worth promoting.
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.