Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38028236›Full record

ReviewEuropean urology open science2023

Off-clamp Versus On-clamp Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Quantitative Synthesis by the European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists Renal Cancer Study Group.

Nikita Shrivastava, Gopal Sharma, Puneet Ahluwalia, Gagan Gautam, Selcuk Erdem, Daniele Amparore, Michele Marchioni, Nicola Pavan, Laura Marandino, Eduard Roussel and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European urology open science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

13 authors.

Nikita ShrivastavaDepartment of Urology, DKS Superspeciality Hospital and Postgraduate Institute, Raipur, India.
Gopal SharmaUrologic Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Medanta The Medicity, Gurugram, India.
Puneet AhluwaliaUrologic Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Medanta The Medicity, Gurugram, India.
Gagan GautamUrologic Oncology and Robotic Surgery, Medanta The Medicity, Gurugram, India.
Selcuk ErdemUrologic Oncology Division, Urology Department, Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Daniele AmparoreDivision of Urology, Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Orbassano, Italy.
Michele MarchioniLaboratory of Biostatistics, Department of Medical, Oral and Biotechnological Sciences, G. D'Annunzio Chieti-Pescara University, Chieti, Italy.
Nicola PavanUnit of Urology, Department of Surgical, Oncological and Oral Sciences, P. Giaccone University Hospital, Palermo, Italy.
Laura MarandinoClinical Research Fellow in Renal & Melanoma, Royal Marsden Hospital, London, UK.
Eduard RousselDepartment of Urology, University Hospitals of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Riccardo CampiUnit of Urological Robotic Surgery and Renal Transplantation, Careggi Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy.
Riccardo BertoloUrology Unit, San Carlo di Nancy Hospital, Rome, Italy.
European Association of Urology Young Academic Urologists Renal Cancer Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context: The superiority of off-clamp robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) over the on-clamp technique has recently been questioned by randomized controlled trials comparing the two techniques. Objective: To systematically review the recent literature and perform a quantitative synthesis of data on the comparison of off-clamp versus off-clamp hilar control during RAPN. Evidence acquisition: A systematic search was performed in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus databases for studies comparing off-clamp versus on-clamp RAPN in terms of perioperative and functional outcomes. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023413160). Only prospective randomized controlled trials and retrospective matched observational studies were included. The primary outcome of the study was the percentage decrease in the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Evidence synthesis: A total of 11 studies were included involving a total of 2483 patients (944 patients in the off-clamp and 1539 patients in the on-clamp group). There was no difference between the two groups in the percentage decline in eGFR (mean difference [MD] 0.04%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -3.7% to 3.86%; Conclusions: Our review revealed no clinically relevant differences in perioperative and functional outcomes between off-clamp and on-clamp RAPN. Patient summary: In this review, we compared the two methods of controlling the kidney blood vessels during robot-assisted surgery to remove part of the kidney. We noted that there was no difference between the two groups for outcomes such as complications and the decrease in kidney function after surgery.

Indexed as

IschemiaKidney cancerOff-clampPartial nephrectomy

Identifiers

PMID38028236
PMCPMC10630115

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.