ArticleSurgical endoscopy2024
Open versus robot-assisted retroperitoneal tumors resection involving inferior vena cava, abdominal aorta, and renal hilum: a comparative study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Short-term perioperative safety and long-term follow-up after robotic-assisted resection of non-renal, non-adrenal retroperitoneal tumors: a 10-year retrospective cohort study.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Article
- Global trends in robot-assisted retroperitoneal tumor surgery: a bibliometric and visualized analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
- Article
- Robotic retroperitoneal tumor resection: a video vignette.Journal of minimally invasive surgery · 2025Article
- Literature review and robotic management of a rare case of primary retroperitoneal mucinous cystadenoma.Radiology case reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSurgery is currently the only effective treatment for retroperitoneal tumors that do not involve any specific organ. The use of robots for removing both benign and malignant retroperitoneal tumors is considered safe and feasible. However, there is insufficient evidence to determine whether robotic retroperitoneal tumor resection (RMBRs) is superior to open retroperitoneal malignant resection (OMBRs). This study compares the short-term outcomes of robotic excision of benign and malignant retroperitoneal tumors with open excision of the same-sized tumors.
methodsThe study compared demographics and outcomes of patients who underwent robotic resection (n = 54) vs open resection (n = 54) of retroperitoneal tumors between March 2018 and December 2022. A 1:1 matching analysis was conducted to ensure a fair comparison.
resultsThe study found that RBMRs resulted in reduced operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBM), and postoperative hospital stay (PSH) when compared to OBMRs. Additionally, RBMRs reduced EBL, PHS, and OT for patients with malignant tumor involvement in major vessels. No significant differences were found in tumor size, blood transfusion rate, and morbidity rate between the RBMRs and OBMRs groups.
conclusionWhen comparing RMBRs to OMBRs, it was observed that RMBR was associated with lower (EBL), shorter postoperative hospital stays (PHS), and reduced operative time (OT) in a specific group of patients with both benign and malignant tumors.
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.