ArticleYonago acta medica2022
A Comparison Between Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Patients with Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.
Article in Yonago acta medica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term outcomes of robotic vs. laparoscopic pyeloplasty: analysis of the NSQIP database.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Pelvic Ectopic Kidney in an Adult: Robotic-Assisted Surgical Treatment of Unrecognized Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.Case reports in surgery · 2025Article
- Balancing technology and resources: Is robotic pyeloplasty always necessary?Central European journal of urology · 2025Article
- Robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in an adult with pelvic ectopic kidney with hydronephrosis: a case report and literature review.Journal of surgical case reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study is to compare the results of laparoscopic pyeloplasty and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. Methods: Between March 2008 and May 2019, the patients who underwent retroperitoneal laparoscopic or robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in our institution were retrospectively reviewed. Results: Thirteen patients underwent laparoscopically, and 12 patients underwent robotic surgery. The significant difference was found in median operative time between laparoscopic group (296 minutes) and robotic group (199 minutes) ( Conclusion: Laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty is safe and excellent success rates in patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction. However, our experience study suggested that robotic surgery improves a total operative time, decreases drain removal time and less intraoperative blood loss than laparoscopic 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.