Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32775276›Full record

ReviewGland surgery2020

Robotic adrenalectomy: evaluation of cost-effectiveness.

Carmela De Crea, Giovanni Arcuri, Francesco Pennestrì, Chiara Paolantonio, Rocco Bellantone, Marco Raffaelli

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Gland surgery, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

6 authors.

Carmela De CreaDipartimento Universitario di Medicina e Chirurgia Traslazionale, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Giovanni ArcuriUOC Tecnologie Sanitarie, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Roma, Italy.
Francesco PennestrìUOC Chirurgia Endocrina e Metabolica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Roma - Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Chiara PaolantonioUOC Chirurgia Endocrina e Metabolica, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Roma - Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Roma, Italy.
Rocco BellantoneDipartimento Universitario di Medicina e Chirurgia Traslazionale, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Marco RaffaelliDipartimento Universitario di Medicina e Chirurgia Traslazionale, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) is the preferred treatment option for adrenal lesions, considering the improved patients outcomes, due to the reduced postoperative morbidity and postoperative pain, the faster recovery and the shorter length of hospital stay. The widespread diffusion of robotic technology led to the development and standardization of robot-assisted approach to adrenalectomy. However, to date, no clear benefit from the use of the robot-assisted approach has been found. The higher costs remain an important drawback and limit the implementation of robot-assisted adrenalectomy (RA) programs. This review summarizes the current available data regarding RA including its operative outcomes, advantages and drawbacks in comparison with conventional LA, evaluating its cost-effectiveness.

Indexed as

adrenal tumourscost-effectivenessminimally invasive adrenalectomypersonalized medicineRobotic adrenalectomy

Identifiers

PMID32775276
PMCPMC7347830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.