Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35950394›Full record

ArticleBeijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences2022

[Trends in upper urinary tract reconstruction surgery over a decade based on a multi-center database].

W Zuo, F Gao, C W Yuan, S W Xiong, Z H Li, L Zhang, K L Yang, X F Li, L Liu, L Wei and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

W ZuoDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
F GaoDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
C W YuanDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
S W XiongDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
Z H LiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
L ZhangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
K L YangDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
X F LiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
L LiuDepartment of Urology, Beijing Jiangong Hospital, Beijing 100054, China.
L WeiDepartment of Urology, Beijing Jiangong Hospital, Beijing 100054, China.
P ZhangDepartment of Urology, Emergency General Hospital, Beijing 100028, China.
B WangDepartment of Urology, Miyun District Hospital (Miyun Hospital, Peking University First Hospital), Beijing 101599, China.
Y M GuDepartment of Urology, Miyun District Hospital (Miyun Hospital, Peking University First Hospital), Beijing 101599, China.
H J ZhuDepartment of Urology, Beijing Jiangong Hospital, Beijing 100054, China.
Z ZhaoDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
X S LiDepartment of Urology, Peking University First Hospital; Institute of Urology, Peking University; National Urological Cancer Center, Beijing 100034, China.
Beijing United Family Hospital · CNBeijing Aerospace General Hospital · CNBeijing Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo study the trend of surgical type, surgical procedure and etiological distribution of upper urinary tract repair in recent 10 years.

methodsThe preoperative and perioperative variables and follow-up data of upper urinary tract reconstruction surgery in RECUTTER (Reconstruction of Urinary Tract: Technology, Epidemiology and Result) database from 2010 to 2021 were searched, collected and analyzed. The surgical type, surgical procedure, duration of hospitalization, time of operation, incidence of short-term complications, and proportion of the patients undergoing reoperations were compared between the two groups of 2010-2017 period and 2018-2021 period.

resultsA total of 1 072 patients were included in the RECUTTER database. Congenital factors and iatrogenic injuries were the main causes of upper urinary tract repair. Among them, 129 (12.0%) patients had open operation, 403 (37.6%) patients had laparoscopic surgery, 322 (30.0%) patients had robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery and 218 (20.3%) patients had endourological procedure. In the last decade, the total number of surgeries showed a noticeable increasing annual trend and the proportion of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery in 2018-2021 was significantly higher than that in 2010-2017 (

conclusionWe have justified the value of the RECUTTER database, created by the Institute of Urology, Peking University in data support for clinical research work, and provided valuable experience for the construction of other multi-center databases at home and abroad. In recent 10 years, we have observed that, in upper urinary tract reconstruction surgery, the surgery type tends to be minimally invasive and the surgery procedure tends to be complicated, suggesting the superiority of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery.

Indexed as

LaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresUreterUreteral ObstructionHumansRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUrologic Surgical ProceduresDatabaseReconstructive surgical proceduresRobotic surgical proceduresUpper urinary tract

Identifiers

PMID35950394
PMCPMC9385503
OpenAlexW4291019800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.