ArticleInternational journal of clinical practice2022
Comparison of Open and Robot-Assisted Kidney Transplantation in terms of Perioperative and Postoperative Outcomes.
Article in International journal of clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 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
- Artificial intelligence and machine learning in transplantation surgery care pathway.World journal of transplantation · 2026Review
- National comparison of outcomes after robotic kidney transplantation and open kidney transplantation.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- The road to 100: single center experience with the first 100 consecutive robotic kidney transplants.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: Technical evolution and applications in complex scenarios.Current urology · 2026Article
- Analyzing the impact of human leukocyte antigen mismatch on the incidence of prostate cancer and the advantage of T cell therapy in patients after kidney transplantation based on the United Network for Organ Sharing database.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Robotic kidney transplantation.Nature reviews. Urology · 2024Review
- Comparison of outcomes after open versus robotic kidney transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The gold standard treatment method for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is renal transplantation (RT). RT can be done with open or minimally invasive surgical methods. We aimed to compare the outcomes between patients who underwent robot-assisted renal transplantation (RART) and open renal transplantation (ORT). Methods: Data of the patients who underwent ORT or RART in two institutions between June 2015 and February 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who underwent live donor RT were included, and all donor nephrectomy procedures were performed by the laparoscopic technique. Demographic data, ischemia times, anastomosis times, operation times, and postoperative complications were recorded. Results: 98 patients were included in the ORT group, while 91 patients were included in the RART group. There was a significant difference between the two groups regarding mean patient age. While total ischemia time was 86.9 ± 7 minutes in the RART group, it was calculated as 71.2 ± 3.3 minutes in the ORT group, with a significant difference. The anastomosis time was significantly shorter in the ORT group than in the RART group. The incision length and duration of hospital stay were significantly shorter, visual analogue scores were significantly lower, and estimated blood loss was less in the RART group than in the ORT group. Conclusion: Both ORT and RART are effective and safe methods for treating ESRD. According to our study, RART is associated with relatively longer ischemia times but lower complication rates and higher patient comfort.
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.