SynthesisWorld journal of surgical oncology2023
Perioperative and oncologic outcomes of transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma: a systematic review and pooled analysis of comparative outcomes.
Synthesis in World journal of surgical oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A bibliometric study and visualization analysis of the current status and perspectives in upper tract urothelial carcinoma.Medicine · 2026Article
- Operative approaches and outcomes of nephroureterectomy for UTUC: a network meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Single-position versus traditional retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for UTUC: long-term survival and perioperative outcomes.BMC urology · 2026Article
- Comparative efficacy of transperitoneal and retroperitoneal laparoscopic nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: a multicenter propensity score-matched study.International urology and nephrology · 2026Review
- The surgical technique and efficacy of a novel pure retroperitoneoscopic extravesical bladder cuff excision without intraoperative repositioning for upper tract urothelial carcinoma.International urology and nephrology · 2025Article
- Prone retroperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy with bladder cuff excision in single position: techniques and outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Comparison of Oncological Outcomes between Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Approaches in Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomies for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe debate on whether to choose a transperitoneal (TP) or retroperitoneal (RP) approach for treating upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) with laparoscopic surgery has been drawing attention. This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the existing evidence regarding oncologic and perioperative outcomes of transperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (TLNU) and retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (RLNU) in managing UTUC.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar for identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that evaluated the outcomes of TLNU and RLNU for UTUC. Continuous variables were represented by weighted mean difference (WMD) and standard mean difference (SMD), while binary variables were represented by odds ratio (OR), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. A sensitivity analysis was performed to evaluate the robustness of the estimates.
resultSix observational studies were incorporated into this meta-analysis. The overall TLNU was associated with significantly shorter operating time (WMD - 19.85; 95% CI - 38.03 to - 1.68; P = 0.03); longer recovery time of intestinal function (SMD 0.46; 95% CI 0.08 to 0.84; P = 0.02). However, the terms of estimated blood loss (WMD - 5.72; 95% CI - 19.6 to - 8.15; P = 0.42); length of stay (WMD - 0.35; 95% CI - 1.61 to 0.91; P = 0.59), visual analog pain scale (WMD - 0.38; 95% CI - 0.99 to 0.84; P = 0.22); drainage duration (WMD - 0.22; 95% CI - 0.61 to 0.17; P = 0.26); overall complication rates (OR 1.24; 95% CI 0.58 to 2.63; P = 0.58); local recurrence rate (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.3 to 1.21; P = 0.16); distant metastasis (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.04 to 20.77; P = 0.97); 1-year overall survival (OS) (OR 0.45; 95% CI 0.1 to 2.01; P = 0.3) showed no difference between TLNU and RLUN.
conclusionTLNU provides similar surgical outcomes and oncologic results compared to RLUN; however, TLNU has a shorter procedure time and prolonged intestinal function recovery time. Due to the heterogeneity among the studies, randomized clinical trials with follow-ups in the long term are required to obtain more definite results.
trial registrationwww.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ , identifier CRD42023388554.
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.