ArticleFrontiers in pediatrics2024
Laparoscopic pyeloplasty in neonates and infants is safe and efficient.
Article in Frontiers in pediatrics, 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 outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with pelviureteric junction obstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
- Beyond the narrow passage: comparative outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic pyeloplasty in infants.Pediatric surgery international · 2026Article
- Da Vinci robotic assisted pyeloplasty versus laparoscopic pyeloplasty in newborns under 3 months.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A novel fascial plane block for pediatric open pyeloplasty: Clinical experience with the quadro-iliac plane block-A report of five cases.Saudi journal of anaesthesiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Dismembered laparoscopic pyeloplasty (LP) is a well-accepted treatment modality for ureteropelvic junction obstruction (UPJO) in children. However, its efficacy and safety in infants, particularly neonates, remain uncertain. To address this significant knowledge gap, we aimed to compare outcomes between a cohort of neonates and infants undergoing LP vs. open pyeloplasty (OP) at less than 6 months and 6 weeks of age. Material and methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of data from patients who underwent primary pyeloplasty at our institution between 2000 and 2022. Only patients aged 6 months or less at the time of surgery were included, excluding redo-procedures or conversions. Ethical approval was obtained, and data were assessed for redo-pyeloplasty and postoperative complications, classified according to the Clavien-Madadi classification. A standard postoperative assessment was performed 6 weeks postoperatively. This included an isotope scan and a routine ultrasound up to the year 2020. Results: A total of 91 eligible patients were identified, of which 49 underwent LP and 42 underwent OP. Patients receiving LP had a median age of 11.4 (1-25.4) weeks, compared to 13.8 (0.5-25.9) weeks for those receiving OP ( Conclusion: To our knowledge, this is one of the largest collectives of laparoscopic pyeloplasty performed in infants, and it is the youngest cohort published to date. Based on our experience, LP in neonates and infants under 6 months appears to be as effective as open surgery.
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.