Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38353825›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024

Robotic transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal approach for anterior renal mass nephron-sparing surgery.

Nicholas J Lanzotti, Michael Felice, Sarang Janakiraman, Owen Lewer, Christopher James, Jeffrey L Ellis, Goran Rac, Hiten D Patel, Gopal N Gupta

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Robotic retroperitoneal tumor resection: a video vignette.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicholas J LanzottiDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA. Nicholas.lanzotti@luhs.org.
Michael FeliceDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Sarang JanakiramanDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Owen LewerDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Christopher JamesDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Jeffrey L EllisDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Goran RacDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Hiten D PatelDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Gopal N GuptaDepartment of Urology, Loyola University Medical Center, 2160 S 1st Avenue, Maywood, IL, 60153, USA.
Loyola University Medical Center · USNorthwestern University · US

Funding

Summer Research Experience for Medical Students in Inflammation and Infectious DiseasesT35AI125220 · NIAID · LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO · PI Edward M. Campbell, Simon Kaja · 2017 to 2026
$510k
NIAID NIH HHS T35 AI125220
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Robotic nephron-sparing surgery is traditionally performed via a transperitoneal (TP) approach. However, the retroperitoneal (RP) approach has gained popularity, particularly for posterolateral renal masses. The RP approach is associated with shorter operative time, less blood loss, and shorter length of stay, while preserving oncologic outcomes in selected masses. Here, we aim to assess the feasibility of the RP approach in excising anterior renal masses. Patients ≥ 18 years of age who underwent robotic nephron-sparing surgery for anterior renal masses were retrospectively identified (2008-2022). Baseline demographics, tumor characteristics, and perioperative data were collected and characterized based on TP vs RP approaches. Wilcoxon rank sum test and Pearson's Chi-squared test were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively. Two hundred and sixteen patients were included-178 (82.4%) underwent TP approach and 38 (17.6%) underwent RP approach. Baseline demographics, preoperative tumor size, and renal nephrometry scores were similar. The RP approach was associated with shorter operative (150 vs 203 min, p < 0.001) and warm ischemia time (12 vs 21 min, p < 0.001), and less blood loss (20 vs 100 cc, p = 0.002) (Table 1). The RP approach was associated with shorter length of stay (1 vs 2 days, p < 0.001) and less total complications (5.3% vs 19.1%, p = 0.038). Major complication (Clavien-Dindo Grade > 3) rates were similar. There was no difference in positive surgical margin rates or pathologic characteristics. Robotic RP approach for nephron-sparing surgery is feasible for eligible anterior tumors and is associated with favorable perioperative outcomes with preserved negative surgical margin rates. Table 1 Patient baseline demographics Overall Transperitoneal Retroperitoneal p value Median/N IQR/% Median/N IQR/% Median/N IQR/% N 216 178 82.4% 38 17.6% Age (years) 60.5 (52.1-67.7) 60.4 (52.8-67.7) 61.6 (49.1-69.2) 0.393 Sex Male 126 58.3% 100 56.2% 26 68.4% Female 90 41.7% 78 43.8% 12 31.6% 0.165 Race White 162 75.0% 137 77.0% 25 65.8% Asian 4 1.9% 2 1.1% 2 5.3% Black 21 9.7% 18 10.1% 3 7.9% Hispanic 26 12.0% 18 10.1% 8 21.1% Other 2 0.9% 2 1.1% 0 0.0% 0.197 Body mass index (kg/m

Indexed as

NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresFemaleHumansMaleNephrectomyNephronsRetrospective StudiesKidney cancerRetroperitoneal surgeryRobotic partial nephrectomy

Identifiers

PMID38353825
PMCPMC11001301
OpenAlexW4391822957

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.