ArticleEuropean urology open science2021
Outcomes of Postchemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection from a High-volume UK Centre Compared with a National Data Set.
Article in European urology open science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus open post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection: a propensity score matched study across 11 academic medical centers.World journal of urology · 2026Article
- [Retroperitoneal lymphadenectomy in the treatment of testicular germ cell tumors-Is the robot-assisted technique superior to the open surgical approach?]Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Review
- Assessing complications from retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testicular cancer in North America.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025Article
- Treatment de-escalation for stage II seminoma.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023Review
- Complete Vascular Replacement of the Infrarenal Inferior Vena Cava and Abdominal Aorta during Post-Chemotherapy Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for a Non-Seminomatous Germ Cell Tumor.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Twenty Years' Experience in Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Testicular Cancer in a Tertiary Referral Center.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
- Minimally invasive retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for men with testis cancer: a retrospective cohort study of safety and feasibility.World journal of urology · 2022Article
- Orthotopic renal autotransplantation: A step forward during postchemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for germ cell tumor.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRetroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) is essential for the treatment of metastatic germ cell tumours of the testis. Recommendations on the referral and management of complex urological cancers in the UK includes centralisation of services to regional centres.
objectiveTo review contemporary PC-RPLND outcomes at a high-volume centre with a complex case-mix, and compare with national registry data. DESIGN SETTING AND
participantsWe retrospectively reviewed the medical records of PC-RPLNDs performed for germ cell tumours at our centre between July 2012 and September 2018. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Primary outcomes were Clavien 3+ complications, histology, rates of positive margin, relapse, in-field recurrences, and mortality. Secondary outcomes were blood loss, operation time, blood transfusion, adjuvant procedures, length of stay, and lymph node count. Surgical and histological outcomes of all RPLNDs for testicular cancers were compared with national RPLND registry data. For statistical difference, χ RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 178 procedures were performed, including 31 (17%) redo RPLNDs. Clavien 3+ complications occurred in 11 (7%). Histological findings in non-redo cases were the following: necrosis 24%, teratoma 62%, viable germ cell tumour 11%, and dedifferentiated cancers 3%. Rates of positive margin, relapse, and in-field recurrence were 11%, 17%, and 2%, respectively. Overall survival was 89% at a median of 36 mo. The median blood loss was 650 ml (350, 1250), with a transfusion rate of 8%. Nephrectomy, vascular reconstruction, and visceral resection was required in 12%, 6%, and 3% respectively. The median inpatient stay was 6 d (5, 8) and the median node count was 35 (20, 37). A comparison of all RPLNDs with national data showed no statistical difference in primary outcomes. Our blood transfusion rate was significantly lower (12% vs 21%, χ
conclusionsCentralisation led to high quality of RPLND in UK. Within that, our series (the largest in the UK) demonstrates no significant difference in outcomes despite higher complexity cases. Our blood transfusion rates are in fact lower than national figures. Complex RPLNDs should be performed in high-volume centres where possible. PATIENT SUMMARY: In the UK, retroperitoneal lymph node dissections (RPLND) are centralised to specialist centres and the quality of surgery is high, with low complications and good histological outcomes. When compared to national data, we found no significant difference in the majority of outcomes from our high-volume centre despite our complex case-mix.
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.