SynthesisWorld journal of urology2024
Use of omentum during robotic-assisted reconstructive urological surgery: a systematic review of the current literature.
Synthesis 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 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.
- Application of Photocrosslinkable Wet-Adhesive Composite Hydrogel Adhesive in Bladder Injury Repair.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Step-by-step combined surgical approach to successfully repair complex and challenging vesico-vaginal fistulas: Insights from a case series.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
- Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Transvesical Closure of a Vesicovaginal Fistula: First Report in a Teenage Girl.European journal of pediatric surgery reports · 2026Article
- [Surgical techniques and clinical outcomes of upper urinary tract reconstruction for stone-related ureteral strictures].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDue to its biological properties, the omentum is a very useful tool in the hands of reconstructive urologists. The purpose of this systematic review is to present all existing evidence regarding the use of omentum during different robotic-assisted reconstructive urological surgeries.
methodsIn accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Guidelines, three databases (PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane) were systematically screened. The following search string was used: (omentum OR omental) AND robotic. Retrospective studies and case-series were included, while case-reports were not included.
results13 studies met all eligibility criteria and were included in final qualitative synthesis. Seven studies reported robotic vesicovaginal fistula repair, two studies reported robotic vesicouterine or vesicocervical fistula repair, one study reported robotic rectovesical fistula repair, one study reported robotic rectourethral fistula repair, one study reported ureterolysis with omental wrap and one study reported robotic repair of long ureteral strictures with omental wrap and autologous onlay flap or graft ureteroplasty. Recurrence rates ranged from 0% to 6.7%. The Grade I-II complications according to Clavien-Dindo Classification ranged from 0 to 40%, while no Grade III-IV were reported.
conclusionRobotic repair with the use of omentum is potentially a feasible, safe and efficient approach for complicated urological surgeries, such as vesicovaginal, vesicouterine, vaginocervical, rectovesical and rectourethral fistulas, idiopathic retroperitoneal fibrosis and long ureteral strictures. Because the evidence is based on small case series, further publications are needed to enhance confidence in omental harvesting and render it a routine component of reconstructive Urology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39495338What 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.