ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2022
Redo laparoscopic pyeloplasty for recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction: Propensity score matched analyses of a high-volume center.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- What is the best surgical approach for redo pyeloplasty in children? A systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Challenging recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstructions: endoscopic procedures versus redo-pyeloplasty-a systematic review and meta-analysis.World journal of urology · 2026Pooled it
- Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis following pyeloplasty in children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.Pediatric surgery international · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic tubular pyeloureteroplasty using flap and lingual mucosal graft: a case report and literature review.Translational andrology and urology · 2025Article
- Current Status and Future Perspectives of Robotic-Assisted Redo Pyeloplasty for Recurrent Ureteropelvic Junction Obstruction.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2025Review
- Failure in Double-J stent inserting in laparoscopic pyeloplasty of ureteropelvic junction obstruction: the clinical features and outcomes.BMC urology · 2023Article
- Redo Laparoscopic Pyeloplasty in Children: Results from a Multicentric Series.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Review the experience of redo laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RLP) in patients with recurrent ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in comparison to primary laparoscopic pyeloplasty (PLP) and redo open pyeloplasty (ROP), and determine the feasibility and effectiveness of RLP for recurrent UPJO in children. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of patients treated with transperitoneal PLP, RLP, and ROP for UPJO from December 2015 to December 2022. The Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance confounding variables. RLP patients were 1:4 matched with PLP and 1:3 matched with ROP. The primary outcomes were failure and post-operative complications. Complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo grading system. Results: The study included ten patients who underwent RLP, 43 patients who underwent ROP, and 412 patients who underwent PLP. The follow-up time ranged from 6 to 36 months in the RLP group, 12 to 60 months in the PLP group, and 24 to 54 months in the ROP group. In the RLP group, no failure but three post-operative complications (Clavien grade II) were observed during the follow-up. Compared with the PLP group, the older age, higher weight, larger pre-operative anteroposterior diameter (APD) and APD/cortical thickness (P/C ratio), longer operation time, and post-operative length of stay (LOS) in the RLP group ( Conclusions: Our result demonstrated that RLP performed as well as PLP except for a longer operation time. Compared with ROP, RLP has the advantages of a clearer surgical view, sufficient exposure, clearer anatomical landmark position, and minor trauma with a comparable clinical outcome. On experienced hands, RLP for recurrent UPJO after is a safe and effective procedure and should be considered an excellent alternative to the more commonly recommended ROP in select patients.
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.