ArticleTurkish journal of urology2021
Impact of three-dimensional vision in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for renal tumors.
Article in Turkish journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Influence of 3D Technology Integration on Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy Practice and Surgical Outcomes.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Three-dimensional light-field microendoscopy with a GRIN lens array.Biomedical optics express · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare three-dimensional (3D) with standard two-dimensional (2D) laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) with respect to intra- and postoperative outcomes. MATERIAL AND
methodsData from 112 patients who underwent transperitoneal LPN from 2012 to 2014 by a single experienced surgeon were collected. Sixty patients (group 1) underwent conventional 2D LPN and 52 patients (group 2) 3D LPN. Perioperative patient, procedure, and tumor data were recorded. The follow-up period was 1-5 years.
resultsThe two groups had similar patient age (p=0.834) and body mass index (p=0.141). The total laparoscopy time (LT) was shorter in group 2 (119.0 vs. 106.0 min; p=0.009). Warm ischemia times (WITs) were also shorter in group 2 (11.5 vs. 10.0 min; p=0.032). The estimated blood loss (EBL) (350.0 vs. 250.0 mL; p<0.001) and hemoglobin (Hb) decrease (1.55 vs. 1.35 g/dL; p=0.536) were lower in the 3D LPN group. Creatinine (0 vs. 0 g/dL; p=0.610) increase and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decrease (0 vs. 0 mL/min/1.73 m
conclusionThe new-generation 3D laparoscope has a great impact on significant LPN intraoperative parameters, mainly LT, WIT, and EBL. Hb decrease is also in favor of 3D vision, although not dramatically altered. Therefore, 3D LPN appears to be superior to conventional 2D LPNs.
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.