ArticleExperimental and therapeutic medicine2024
Flexible ureteroscopic incision and drainage or laparoscopic unroofing for the parapelvic renal cysts: A systematic review and meta‑analysis.
Article in Experimental and therapeutic medicine, 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.
- Comparison of retroperitoneal laparoscopy with flexible ureteroscopy for treating renal pelvis cysts: superior perioperative outcome with a comparable recurrence rate.American journal of translational research · 2026Article
- Effectiveness and safety of greenlight laser in ureteroscopic parapelvic cyst incision: a retrospective analysis.BMC urology · 2025Article
- Intelligent pressure-controlled percutaneous unroofing: advancing minimally invasive renal cyst treatment.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Percutaneous nephrolithotomy for renal stones combined with laser endoscopy for ipsilateral renal cysts: a case report and literature review.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of the present study was to compare flexible ureteroscopy and laparoscopy in the treatment of peripelvic renal cysts, so as to determine the best treatment method for patients with peripelvic renal cysts. A systematic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CONAHL, Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar, CNKI and WanFang DATA databases was conducted for articles published over 22 years (December 1980-December 2022) using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. By searching the database, a total of 594 studies were found, of which eight were analyzed as evidence. A total of 394 patients were included in the present study. Of these, 193 were treated laparoscopically and 201 were treated by flexible ureteroscopy. In terms of analysis results, radiation reexamination after laparoscopic therapy had a higher success rate. Ureteroscopy has advantages in the time spent in the operation, the amount of blood lost during the operation, the time to recover the anal exhaust after the operation and the length of postoperative hospital stay. There were no significant difference in postoperative recurrence or complications between the two surgical methods. After comprehensive analysis, it was considered that flexible ureteroscopy has more advantages in the treatment of peripelvic renal cyst, which is mainly manifested in the duration of operation, the total amount of blood loss during operation, the interval of recovery of anal exhaust after operation and the total length of postoperative hospital stay. It is worth further exploration and promotion.
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.