ArticleAsian journal of urology2024
Robotic-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for stage II testicular cancer.
Article in Asian journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robot-assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection in testicular cancer: state of the art and future perspectives.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- Robotic Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Testicular Cancer-First Experience and Learning Curve of a Single Surgeon.Cancers · 2025Article
- Testicular Cancer Treatments and Sexuality: A Narrative Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Twenty Years' Experience in Retroperitoneal Lymph Node Dissection for Testicular Cancer in a Tertiary Referral Center.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the perioperative as well as early oncological outcomes of patients undergoing robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for treatment of testicular cancer. Methods: We conducted a prospective consecutive case series of patients undergoing robotic assisted retroperitoneal lymph node dissection for metastatic testicular cancer between May 2018 and July 2021 at our institution. Data were collected on patient and tumour characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative parameters, and functional and oncological outcomes. Descriptive statistics are presented. Results: Nineteen patients were identified; 18 (94.7%) completed the procedure robotically and one was converted to open surgery; 78.9% of patients had stage ≥IIB and 12 (63.2%) patients had undergone prior chemotherapy. The median operative time was 300 (interquartile range [IQR] 240-315) min. Median blood loss was 100 (IQR 50-175) mL. Median length of stay was 2 (range 1-11) days. All robotically completed patients commenced diet and passed flatus on Day 1 and were discharged by Day 3. The median lymph node yield was 40.5 (IQR 38-51) nodes. All patients undergoing nerve-sparing procedures recovered antegrade ejaculatory function. One patient had a Clavien-Dindo III complication (chylous ascites requiring drainage). At a median follow-up of 22.3 (IQR 16.3-24.9) months, one patient developed retroperitoneal recurrence, which was successfully treated with second-line chemotherapy; no other patients have had recurrences. Conclusion: Robotic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection is a safe and feasible alternative to open surgery in appropriately selected patients, offering low morbidity. Early oncological outcomes are promising. Larger cohorts and longer follow-ups are required to validate our institution's findings.
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.