ArticleBMJ open2024
Comparison of outcomes of open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty in children with ureteropelvic junction obstruction: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in BMJ open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 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
- Multimodal treatment for failed pyeloplasty: Description of a new technique.Urology case reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe treatment of children with pelviureteric junction obstruction (PUJO) has naturally progressed from open, to minimally invasive approaches, including laparoscopic pyeloplasty and robot-assisted laparoscopic pyeloplasty (RALP). The RALP is now considered to be the gold standard for paediatric patients with PUJO, except for smaller infants due to size limitations. Our systematic review aims to synthesise all the available evidence regarding key postoperative outcomes for the three surgical approaches to pyeloplasties in children. Our outcomes of interest include, but are not limited to, the reoperation rate, length of hospital stay and postoperative complications as classified by the Clavien-Dindo grading system. A comprehensive assessment of all three methods in paediatric patients has yet to be conducted in the literature to date. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A systematic search of the MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane databases will be conducted. Screening, data extraction, statistical analysis and reporting will be performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Included papers will be full-text manuscripts written between 1947 and March 2024, comparing the outcomes and complications of open, laparoscopic and RALP. Quality and study bias will be assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa score and, if relevant, the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. This present protocol is written in accordance with the PRISMA Protocol 2015 checklist, ensuring that the highest methodological standards are adhered to. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval shall be required, as this is a review of already published literature. Findings will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at international and national conferences. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42023456779.
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.