Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37099087›Full record

ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2023

First Comparison of Retroperitoneal Versus Transperitoneal Robot-Assisted Nephroureterectomy with Bladder Cuff: A Single Center Study.

P Sparwasser, L Frey, N D Fischer, A Thomas, R Dotzauer, C Surcel, M P Brandt, R Mager, T Höfner, A Haferkamp and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article 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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

P SparwasserDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany. Spa87@gmx.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8469-8113
L FreyDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
N D FischerDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
A ThomasDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
R DotzauerDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
C SurcelCentre of Urological Surgery, Dialysis and Renal Transplantation, Fundeni Clinical Institute, Bucharest, Romania.
M P BrandtDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
R MagerDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
T HöfnerDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
A HaferkampDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
I TsaurDepartment of Urology, University Medical Center Johannes Gutenberg University, Mainz, Germany.
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz · DEInstitutul Clinic Fundeni · RO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAfter recent presentation of the first complete robot-assisted retroperitoneal nephroureterectomy with bladder cuff (RRNU) for patients with upper tract urothelial cancer (UTUC), we aimed to compare this new surgical technique with robot-assisted transperitoneal nephroureterectomy (TRNU) representing the current standard of care.

methodsRobot-assisted nephroureterectomies (NUs) were retrospectively analyzed and compared based on two groups: transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal approach. Baseline data were collected for patient demographics, tumor characteristics, intra- (EAUiaiC) and postoperative (Clavien-Dindo) complications, and perioperative variables. Tumor characteristics included grade of malignancy, clinical stage, and surgical margin status. Short-term follow-up data including 30-day readmission rates were collected. Statistical analyses were performed assuming a significant p-value of < 0.05.

resultsThe analysis includes perioperative patient data after proven UTUC of 24 TRNU versus 12 RRNU (mean age: 70 versus 71 years; BMI: 25.9 versus 26.1 kg/m

conclusionWe report the first head-to-head comparison between RRNU and TRNU. RRNU proves to be a safe and feasible approach which appears to be non-inferior to TRNU. RRNU expands the spectrum of minimally invasive treatment options, particularly for patients with major previous abdominal surgery.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Transitional CellLaparoscopyRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresUrinary Bladder NeoplasmsAgedHumansNephroureterectomyRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeUrinary Bladder

Identifiers

PMID37099087
OpenAlexW4367047641

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.