ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2020
Comparison of surgical outcomes between lateral and posterior approaches for retroperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy: A single surgeon's experience.
Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of surgical outcomes between lateral and posterior methods for retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy: insights from a single center's experience.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Single-Port Robotic Posterior Retroperitoneoscopic Adrenalectomy: Current Perspectives, Technical Considerations, and Future Directions.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Transabdominal and retroperitoneal adrenalectomy: comparative study.Surgical endoscopy · 2024Article
- Establishment and validation of a nomogram for predicting the surgical difficulty of lateral retroperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy.Translational andrology and urology · 2023Article
- Is acute kidney injury after laparoscopic adrenalectomy related to the progression of chronic kidney disease in patients with primary aldosteronism?Investigative and clinical urology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To compare surgical outcomes between the lateral and the posterior approach for retroperitoneal laparoscopic adrenalectomy (RLA). Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 130 patients who underwent RLA for adrenal tumors by a single surgeon between January 2015 and December 2018. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed and compared between two surgical groups: lateral approach (n=56) and posterior approach (n=74). Results: There were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes between the two groups except for operative time (lateral approach, 105.4±41.21 minutes vs. posterior approach, 71.5±31.51 minutes; p=0.001). In the lateral approach group, two patients (3.6%) underwent open conversion, but there were no major complications in either group (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3). Male sex was associated with an operative time of ≥90 minutes in the univariate analysis (p=0.019), but this effect did not remain significant in the multivariate analysis. In the multivariate analysis, large tumor size (>5 cm; p=0.020) and preoperative diagnosis of malignancy (p=0.043) were significantly associated with an operative time of ≥90 minutes. Conclusions: Both the lateral and posterior approaches for RLA were performed safely with similar operative outcomes and are therefore comparable options for the treatment of adrenal tumors. In addition, large tumor size and preoperative diagnosis of malignancy are associated with longer operative times.
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.