ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023
Early perioperative outcomes of single-port compared to multi-port robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy.
Article 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 14 papers, 4 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Single-port versus multi-port robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy in perioperative, oncological, and renal function outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Single-versus multi-port robotic partial nephrectomy: a meta-analytic study of perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Comparative short-term efficacy and safety analysis of a single-port robot in nephrectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of single-port versus multi-port robotic assisted partial nephrectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative and oncological outcomes.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Transferring robotic expertise from multi-port to single-port partial nephrectomy: A comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes and learning curves.BJUI compass · 2026Article
- Global research trends and hotspots in single-port robotic surgery in urology: a bibliometric analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- First Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of Robotic-assisted Partial Nephrectomy Using the DEXTER Robotic Surgery System.European urology open science · 2026Article
- The current landscape of single-port robotic surgery in urology.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Selective by design: early adoption patterns of single-port off-clamp robotic partial nephrectomy in a high-volume center.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Review
- Comparative outcomes of multi-port versus single-port robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy with same-day discharge: impact of surgical approach.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Single-port robot assisted partial nephrectomy via the supine anterior retroperitoneal approach (SARA).Urology case reports · 2025Article
- Implementation of single-port robotic urologic surgery: experience at a large academic center.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
- Single-port robot-assisted pyeloplasty through supine anterior retroperitoneal access.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Single-port (SP) robot-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RAPN) is a promising new technique. The aim of this study was to compare surgical and oncological outcomes of SP-RAPN to the multi-port (MP) surgical platform. This is a retrospective, cohort-based study involving patients undergoing SP-RAPN between 2019 and 2020 at a single institution. Demographic, preoperative, surgical, and postoperative outcomes data were gathered and compared to a 1-to-1 matched MP cohort. A total of 50 SP and 50 matched MP cases were included. Length of surgery and ischemia time were not statistically significant between the two cohorts; however, estimated blood loss (EBL) was significantly lower in the SP group than in the MP (IQR 25-50 vs. IQR 50-100 mL, p = 0.002). No differences were seen in regard to the 30-day readmission rate, surgical margin status, pain scores, and complications between the two approaches. We found no statistically significant differences in positive margins, pain score, length of stay, or readmission rate between matched SP and MP patients. These data support the viability of the SP technique as an alternative to MP-RAPN when in the hands of experienced surgeons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37432590What 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.