ArticleCureus2024
Single-Port Robotic Ureteroenteric Stricture Repair: A Retrospective Cohort Review.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Robotic versus open surgery for ureteroenteric stricture after radical cystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Robotic Ureteroileal Bypass Repair for Post-Cystectomy Bricker Ureteroenteric Anastomotic Strictures: Stepwise Approach and Clinic Outcomes.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Robot-assisted conversion of ureterocutaneous stoma to ileal conduit: a novel option for patients with post-cystectomy cutaneous diversion complicated by ureteral stricture and recurrent infections.Frontiers in urology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The objective of this study is to present a series of 16 cases utilizing single-port robot-assisted repair for ureteroenteric anastomosis stricture (UES). To our knowledge, this is the first case series recorded detailing successful single-port UES revision. Methods A retrospective review of all patients under a single surgeon undergoing single-port robotic revision of ureteroenteric stricture following radical cystectomy with urinary diversion at our institutions from September 2020 through July 2024 was performed. Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were assessed. Results The study consisted of 3 bilateral ureteroenteric strictures and 13 unilateral strictures, more commonly on the left. Stricture length averaged 2.2 cm on the left and 2.1 cm on the right. Surgeries were performed by a single surgeon using the da Vinci SP surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, California, US). The type of stricture repair included excision and primary anastomosis (EPA) with Bricker or Wallace reconstruction or Heineke-Mikulicz (HM) repair, although one case involved the necessity of revision ileocalycostomy. Two of the 16 cases were converted from robotic to open due to extensive adhesions. The average procedure length was 265 minutes (148-440). Length of stay (LOS) ranged from 0-46 days, averaging 4.9 days. There were five postoperative complications encountered including two seromas, two incisional hernias, and an episode of urosepsis. Pre- and postoperative changes in creatinine level ranged from -0.26 to 0.3 mg/dL. No renal units were lost. No patients were readmitted following initial surgical discharge. All patients returned for follow-up; none required repeat intervention. Conclusion SP robotic repair of ureteroenteric anastomoses is safe and feasible. The risk of complications is low with a high chance of success and possibly a lower length of stay; more research is warranted.
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.