Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36879036›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of surgical oncology2023

Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes and Complications of Laparoscopic and Robotic Nephroureterectomy Approaches in Patients with Upper-Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.

Lei Peng, Irfan Mehmud, Chunyang Meng, Dongdong Tang, Kangsen Li, Lijian Gan, Jinze Li, Fulin Yi, Yunxiang Li

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Lei PengDepartment of Urology, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University Medical School, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
Irfan MehmudDepartment of Urology, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University (Luohu Hospital Group), Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Chunyang MengDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Dongdong TangDepartment of Urology, The Second Hospital of Lanzhou University Medical School, Lanzhou, Gansu, China.
Kangsen LiDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Lijian GanDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China.
Jinze LiDepartment of Urology, Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Fulin YiNorth Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, Sichuan, China.
Yunxiang LiDepartment of Urology, Nanchong Central Hospital, The Second Clinical College, North Sichuan Medical College (University), Nanchong, China. liyunxiang369@126.com.
North Sichuan Medical University · CNLanzhou University · CNNanchong Central Hospital · CNShenzhen Luohu People's Hospital · CNShenzhen University Health Science Center · CNWest China Hospital of Sichuan University · CN

Funding

Sichuan Province Science and Technology Planning Project 2020YFS0320Sichuan Provincial Health Committee Research Project 20PJ305
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFor medical institutions without robotic equipment, it remains uncertain whether laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (LNU) can achieve results similar to those of robotic surgery for the treatment of upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC). This meta-analysis aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted radical nephroureterectomy (RANU) with that of LNU using a large sample size of patients.

methodsA systematic meta-analysis was performed using data (available to May 2022) acquired from multiple scientific databases. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) guidelines, according to the protocols registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021264046), were followed to perform this cumulative analysis.

resultsNine high-quality studies were included in this analysis, considering factors such as operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), length of hospital stay (LOS), positive surgical margins (PSM), and complications. Statistical indicators revealed no significant differences between the RANU and LNU groups in terms of OT (weighted mean difference [WMD] 29.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.10 to 59.92; p = 0.22), EBL (WMD -55.30, 95% CI -171.14 to 60.54; p = 0.13), LOS (WMD -0.39, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.25; p = 0.12), PSM (odds ratio [OR] 1.22, 95% CI 0.44-3.36; p = 0.17], or complications (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.49-1.69; p = 0.13).

conclusionThe meta-analysis showed that the perioperative and safety indicators of both RANU and LNU were similar and both showed favorable outcomes in UTUC treatment. However, some uncertainties remain in the implementation and selection of lymph nodes for dissection.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Transitional CellLaparoscopyRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsHumansNephroureterectomyTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID36879036
OpenAlexW4323310003

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.