ArticleWorld journal of urology2023
Comparison of laparoscopic, robotic, and open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for non-seminomatous germ cell tumor: a single-center retrospective cohort study.
Article in World journal of urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of Perioperative and Oncologic Outcomes Between Robotic and Open Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection in Testicular Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Robotic assisted versus non-robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for testicular cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative efficacy and safety of robotic-assisted versus open retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in testicular cancer management: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Current Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Sex Cord Stromal Tumor Patients in Japan.International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in testicular cancer: state of the art and future perspectives.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- The perioperative outcomes of retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in Germany for patients with testicular cancer: Results from the GRAND study.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Robotic retroperitoneal lymph-node dissection for testicular cancer: initial experience.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Robotic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Testicular Cancer-First Experience and Learning Curve of a Single Surgeon.Cancers · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the perioperative outcomes of L-RPLND, R-RPLND and O-RPLND, and determine which one can be the mainstream option.
methodsWe retrospectively reviewed medical records of 47 patients undergoing primary RPLND by three different surgical techniques for stage I-II NSGCT between July 2011 and April 2022 at our center. Standard open and laparoscopic RPLND was performed with usual equipment, and robotic RPLND was operated with da Vinci Si system.
resultsForty-seven patients underwent RPLND during 2011-2022, and 26 (55.3%) of them received L-RPLND, 14 (29.8%) were operated with robot, while 7 (14.9%) were performed O-RPLND. The median follow-up was 48.0 months, 48.0 months, and 60.0 months, respectively. The oncological outcomes were comparable among all groups. In L-RPLND group, there were 8 (30.8%) cases of low grade (Clavien I-II) complications, and 3 (11.5%) cases of high-grade (Clavien III-IV) complications. In R-RPLND group, one (7.1%) low-grade complication and four (28.6%) high-grade complications were observed. In O-RPLND group, there were 2 (28.5%) cases of low-grade complications and one case (14.2%) of high-grade one. The operation duration of L-RPLND was the shortest. In O-RPLND group, the number of positive lymph nodes were higher than other two groups. Patients undergoing open surgery had lower (p < 0.05) red blood cell count, hemoglobin level, and higher (p < 0.05) estimated blood loss, white blood cell count than those receiving either laparoscopic or robotic surgery.
conclusionAll three surgical techniques are comparable in safety, oncological, andrological, and reproductive outcomes under the circumstance of not using primary chemotherapy. L-RPLND might be the most cost-effective option.
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.