Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38475808›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2024

A contemporary comparison of laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for renal cell carcinoma.

Edouard Nicaise, Adam S Feldman, Andrew Gusev, Alice Yu, Naren Nimmagadda, Matthew F Wszolek, Francis McGovern, Michael L Blute, Douglas M Dahl

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Edouard NicaiseDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street GRB 1102, 02114, Boston, MA, USA.
Adam S FeldmanDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street GRB 1102, 02114, Boston, MA, USA. afeldman@partners.org.
Andrew GusevDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street GRB 1102, 02114, Boston, MA, USA.
Alice YuDepartment of Genitourinary Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.
Naren NimmagaddaThe James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Matthew F WszolekDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street GRB 1102, 02114, Boston, MA, USA.
Francis McGovernDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street GRB 1102, 02114, Boston, MA, USA.
Michael L BluteDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street GRB 1102, 02114, Boston, MA, USA.
Douglas M DahlDepartment of Urology, Massachusetts General Hospital, 55 Fruit Street GRB 1102, 02114, Boston, MA, USA.
Massachusetts General Hospital · USJohns Hopkins University · USMoffitt Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo analyze surgical and oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing open partial nephrectomy (OPN) versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for treatment of renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

methodsWe retrospectively investigated our institutional RCC database for patients who underwent PN for RCC from 1997 to 2018. Decision for technique was at the discretion of the operating urologist, following practice patterns and training history. Outcomes analyzed included pre/peri/post-operative parameters, pathologic outcomes, and disease recurrence rates.

results1088 patients underwent PN from 1997 to 2018. After exclusionary criteria, 631 patients who underwent 647 unique PNs for a total of 162 OPN and 485 LPN remained. Baseline, pre-op, and pathologic characteristics were not statistically different. Surgical time was lower in laparoscopic cases [185 vs. 205 min] (p = 0.013). Margin involvement was not statistically different; LPN had lower estimated blood loss (EBL) [150 vs. 250 mL] (p < 0.001) and longer ischemia time [21 vs. 19 min] (p = 0.005). LPN had shorter length of stay [2 vs. 4 days] (p < 0.001), fewer overall complications (p < 0.001), and no significant difference in high-grade complications [2.89 vs. 4.32%] (p = 0.379). Fewer LPN patients developed metastases [1.65 vs. 4.94%] (p = 0.0499). Local recurrence rates were not statistically different [1.24 vs. 3.09%] (p = 0.193). Renal function was equivalent between cohorts post-operatively.

conclusionLong-term oncologic outcomes were not significantly different between LPN versus OPN, with no statistical difference in patient and tumor characteristics. LPN was associated with lower EBL, shorter length of stay, and lower overall complication risk. Renal function was not significantly different between cohorts.

Indexed as

Carcinoma, Renal CellKidney NeoplasmsLaparoscopyHumansNephrectomyRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeLaparoscopyOpen surgeryOutcomesPartial nephrectomyRenal cell carcinomaRenal function

Identifiers

PMID38475808
PMCPMC10929101
OpenAlexW4392714807

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.