Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38767673›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2024

Three-dimensional virtual model for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: a propensity-score matching analysis with a contemporary control group.

Antonio Andrea Grosso, Fabrizio Di Maida, Luca Lambertini, Anna Cadenar, Simone Coco, Elena Ciaralli, Vincenzo Salamone, Gianni Vittori, Agostino Tuccio, Andrea Mari and 2 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Current progress of digital twin construction using medical imaging.Journal of applied clinical medical physics · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors.

Antonio Andrea GrossoDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy. grossoantonioandrea@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5973-789X
Fabrizio Di MaidaDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Luca LambertiniDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Anna CadenarDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Simone CocoDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Elena CiaralliDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Vincenzo SalamoneDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Gianni VittoriDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Agostino TuccioDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Andrea MariDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.
Giuseppe Mario LudovicoDepartment of Urology, "F. Miulli" General Hospital, Acquaviva Delle Fonti, Bari, Italy.
Andrea MinerviniDepartment of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Minimally-Invasive Urology and Andrology, University of Florence-Unit of Oncologic, Careggi Hospital, San Luca Nuovo, 50134, Florence, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare two cohorts of patients submitted to robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) with vs without the use of three-dimensional virtual models (3DVMs).

methodsWe screened a prospective consecutive cohort of 152 patients submitted to RAPN with 3DVM and 1264 patients submitted to RAPN without 3DVM between 2019 and 2022. Propensity score matching analysis (PSMA) was applied. Primary endpoint was to evaluate whereas RAPNs with 3DVM were superior in terms of functional outcomes at 12-month. Secondary endopoints were to compare perioperative and oncological outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses (MVA) tested the associations of clinically significant eGFR drop and 3DVMs. Subgroups analysis was performed for PAUDA-risk categories.

results100 patients for each group were analyzed after PSMA. RAPN with 3DVM presented a higher rate of selective/no clamping procedure (32% vs 16%, p = 0.03) and a higher enucleation rate (40% vs 29%, p = 0.04). As concern to primary endopoint, 12-month functional preservation performed better within 3DVM group in terms of creatinine serum level (median 1.2 [IQR 1.1-1.4] vs 1.6 [IQR 1.1-1.8], p = 0.03) and eGFR (median 64.6 [IQR 56.2-74.1] vs 52.3 [IQR 49.2-74.1], p = 0.03). However, this result was confirmed only in the PADUA ≥ 10 renal masses. Regarding secondary endpoints, no significative difference emerged between the two cohorts. MVA confirmed 3DVM as a protective factor for clinically significant eGFR drop only in high-risk (PADUA ≥ 10) masses.

conclusionsRAPN performed with the use of 3DVM assistance resulted in lower incidence of global ischemia and higher rate of enucleations. The positive impact of such technology was found at 12-month only in high-risk renal masses.

Indexed as

Imaging, Three-DimensionalKidney NeoplasmsNephrectomyPropensity ScoreRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCarcinoma, Renal CellFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesAugmented realityPartial nephrectomyRenal cancerRobotic surgeryThree-dimensional models

Identifiers

PMID38767673
PMCPMC11106151

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.