ArticleEuropean urology open science2022
Transperitoneal Versus Retroperitoneal Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty for Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction in Children. A Multicentre, Prospective Study.
Article in European urology open science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03274050 (To Evaluate the Performance and Efficiency of Robotic Surgery in Children and Adults), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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.
To Evaluate the Performance and Efficiency of Robotic Surgery in Children and Adults
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparative outcomes of robotic-assisted and conventional laparoscopic pyeloplasty in pediatric patients: a decade of evidence.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in children: a systematic review of the literature.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Comparison of outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with pelviureteric junction obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Prone retroperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty for ureteropelvic junction obstruction.Frontiers in surgery · 2026Article
- Letter to the Editor: evaluating the practical implications of robotic-assisted pyeloplasty in pediatric urology.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Lateral decubitus: its influence on hemodynamic and respiratory function during retroperitoneal robotic assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (R-RALP) in children.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Analysis of outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children from a tertiary pediatric center in South India.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2024Article
- Comparative efficacy and safety of different minimal invasive pyeloplasty in treating patients with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: a network meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2023Article
- Day Surgery in Children Undergoing Retroperitoneal Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Is It Safe and Feasible?European urology open science · 2023Article
- 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
- Crossing Vessels in Retroperitoneal Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty: Anatomy and Outcomes.JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic SurgeonsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) has been gaining acceptance among paediatric urologists. Objective: To compare surgical variables and clinical outcomes, including complications and success rate, with RALP using the transperitoneal (T-RALP) and retroperitoneal (R-RALP) approaches. Design setting and participants: We performed a multicentre, prospective, cohort study (NCT03274050) between November 2016 and October 2021 in three paediatric urology teaching centres (transperitoneal approach, Intervention: We performed dismembered pyeloplasty using running monofilament 6-0 absorbable suture. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We assessed intra- and postoperative morbidity (primary outcome) and success (secondary outcome). Data were expressed as medians and interquartile range (25th and 75th percentiles) for quantitative variables, and analysed comparatively. Results and limitations: We operated on 106 children (T-RALP, Conclusions: In selected children, RALP is safe and effective using either the transperitoneal or the retroperitoneal approach, with a shorter hospital stay after R-RALP. Patient summary: In our multicentre, prospective study, we compared the results and complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP) using the transperitoneal and retroperitoneal approaches. We found that RALP is safe and effective using either approach, with a shorter hospital stay after R-RALP.
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.