ArticlePediatric surgery international2024
A comparative study on the efficacy of laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy versus single ureteral bladder reimplantation in treating pediatric complete renal duplication.
Article in Pediatric surgery international, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
objectiveTo explore the therapeutic value of laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy compared to single ureteral bladder reimplantation in the treatment of pediatric complete renal duplication.
methodsThis retrospective study included 80 pediatric patients with complete renal duplication who underwent surgical treatment at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January 2015 to December 2022. Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical approach: the laparoscopic ureteroureterostomy group (LUU group, n = 45) and the single ureteral bladder reimplantation group (UR group, n = 35). The two groups were compared in terms of operative time, intraoperative blood loss, number of stent placements, postoperative length of hospital stay, changes in ante-posterior diameter (APD) of the affected upper kidney pelvis before and after surgery, changes in upper ureteral diameter (UD), changes in upper renal cortex thickness (RCT) and variations in renal function.
resultsThe LUU group demonstrated significantly shorter operative time (t = 3.480, P = 0.004), less intraoperative blood loss (t = -2.465, P = 0.0196), and reduced postoperative length of stay (t = 2.308, P = 0.027) compared to the UR group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding the number of stent placements (x
conclusionBoth LUU and UR procedures are safe and effective in treating pediatric complete renal duplication. Compared to UR, LUU results in shorter operative time, less intraoperative blood loss, and reduced postoperative length of stay, while also causing less damage to the bladder.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39601980What 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.