ArticleBioMed research international2020
Results and Lessons Learned on Robotic Assisted Kidney Transplantation.
Article in BioMed research international, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Access to robotic assisted kidney transplant for recipients: a systematic review and call for reporting standards.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Retracted: Results and Lessons Learned on Robotic Assisted Kidney Transplantation.BioMed research international · 2024Article
- Robot-assisted kidney transplantation: an update.Clinical kidney journal · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2024-03-20Computer-Aided Content or Computer-Generated Content · Concerns/Issues about Data · Concerns/Issues about Referencing/Attributions · Concerns/Issues about Results and/or Conclusions · Concerns/Issues about Peer Review · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Paper Mill · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNowadays, minimally invasive surgery in kidney transplantation is a reality thanks to robotic assistance. In this paper, we describe our experience, how we developed the robotic assisted Kidney transplantation (RAKT) technique, and analyze our results.
resultsDuring the aforementioned period, 82 living donor RAKTs were performed. The mean age was 47.4 ± 13.4 and 50 (61%) were male. Mean body mass index was 25 ± 4.7 and preemptive in 63.7% of cases. Right kidneys and multiple arteries were seen in 14.6% and 12.2%, respectively. Mean operative and rewarming time was 197 ± 42 and 47 ± 9.6 minutes, respectively. Five cases required conversion to open surgery because of abnormal kidney vascularization. Two patients required embolization for subcapsular and hypogastric artery bleeding without repercussion. Three kidneys were lost, two of them due to acute rejection and one because venous thrombosis. Late complications requiring surgery included one kidney artery stenosis, one ureteral stenosis, two lymphoceles, and three hernia repairs. We noticed a significant reduction in time between the first 20 cases and the following ones from 248.25 ± 38.1 to 189.75 ± 25.3 (
conclusionsThe robotic approach is an attractive, minimally invasive method for kidney transplantation, yielding good results. Further studies are needed to consider it a standard approach.
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.