ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2020
Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for germ cell tumour.
Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic assisted versus non-robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testicular cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Pregnancy via Testicular Sperm Extraction for Anejaculation After Neuroblastoma Surgery.IJU case reports · 2026Article
- Role of Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection in Management of Seminomatous Germ Cell Tumor: A Narrative Review.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2025Review
- Lymph Node Dissection in Testicular Cancer: The State of the Art and Future Perspectives.Current oncology reports · 2024Review
- A bibliometric analysis of testicular germ cell tumor research from 2000 to 2020.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- Robotic assisted radical nephrectomy with Inferior vena cava tumor thrombus.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is an infrequently used, but important part of the management of men with metastatic germ cell tumours. The surgery aims to remove the lymph nodes from the primary retroperitoneal landing site from testicular tumours, usually accomplished by removing tissue surrounding the great vessels using a split-and-roll technique. RPLND may be carried out as a primary surgical procedure for staging or treatment of metastases. More frequently it is undertaken as a follow-up after chemotherapy for a residual mass that may contain viable tumour or teratoma. RPLND is recognised as a major surgery with significant risks of morbidity and complications, particularly loss of ejaculation secondary to damage to hypogastric nerves. In select cases, especially during primary RPLND, nerve-sparing surgery may help preserve ejaculation, which maybe of importance to the young men usually treated for germ cell tumours. In recent years, the development of minimally invasive approaches have also offered a means for potential improvement in the pain and post-operative recovery from RPLND. We conducted a narrative review of the literature to assess indications for RPLND, along with operative approaches and techniques and related outcomes. The majority of available literature is in the form of relatively small retrospective case series, hence additional research in this area is desirable.
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.