Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37347357›Full record

ReviewJournal of robotic surgery2023

Perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes of minimally-invasive surgery for highly complex renal tumors (RENAL or PADUA score ≥ 10): an evidence-based analysis.

Xiao-Ran Li, Kun-Peng Li, Jia-le Zuo, Wei Yang, Hao Tan, Wen-Yun Wang, Si-Yu Chen, Jun-Hai Ma, Jun-Sheng Bao, Zhong-Jin Yue

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiao-Ran LiDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Kun-Peng LiDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Jia-le ZuoDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Wei YangDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Hao TanDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Wen-Yun WangDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Si-Yu ChenDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China.
Jun-Hai MaDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China. junhaiurology@163.com.
Jun-Sheng BaoDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China. bjshurol@qq.com.
Zhong-Jin YueDepartment of Urology, Lanzhou University Second Hospital, Lanzhou, China. yuezhongjing@sina.cn.
Lanzhou University Second Hospital · CNLanzhou University · CN

Funding

Cuiying Scientific and Technological Innovation Program of Lanzhou University Second Hospital Grant numbers CY2021-MS-A12 and CY2020- MS08 and 2020QN-09Natural Science Foundation of Gansu Province of China Grant numbers 21JR1RA151the National Natural Science Foundation of China No. 82160146
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The primary objective of the current study is to undertake a comparative analysis of the effectiveness and safety of minimally-invasive partial nephrectomy (MIPN; including laparoscopic and robotic approaches) and open partial nephrectomy (OPN) for the treatment of highly complex renal tumors (defined as PADUA or RENAL score ≥ 10). A comprehensive search was conducted in four electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library) to identify relevant studies published in the English language up to April 2023. The current study employed Review Manager 5.4 and encompassed controlled trials of both MIPN and OPN for the treatment of highly complex renal tumors. This study comprised a total of eight comparative trials involving 1161 patients. MIPN demonstrated a significant reduction in length of hospital stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] - 2.08 days, 95% confidence interval [CI] - 2.48, - 1.68; p < 0.00001), blood loss (WMD - 39.86 mL, 95% CI - 75.32, - 4.39; p = 0.03), transfusion rates (odds ratio [OR] 0.30, 95% CI 0.13, 0.71; p = 0.006), and overall complications (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.31, 0.70; p = 0.0003). However, there were no significant differences between MIPN and OPN in terms of operative time, warm ischemia time, conversion to radical nephrectomy rates, renal functional and oncologic outcomes. This study reveals that MIPN presents several benefits in comparison to OPN, including decreased length of hospital stay, blood loss, transfusion rates, and complications, while still offering renal functional and oncological outcomes that are comparable to those of OPN in patients with highly complex renal tumors.

Indexed as

Kidney NeoplasmsLaparoscopyRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansNephrectomyPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeHighly complex renal tumorsMeta-analysisMinimally-invasive surgical proceduresOpen surgical proceduresOutcomes

Identifiers

PMID37347357
OpenAlexW4381597367

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.