ArticleWorld journal of urology2025
Novel model of the region of interest modified Mayo Adhesive Probability score.
Article in World journal of urology, 2025. 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.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the association between the newly developed region of interest (ROI)-modified Mayo Adhesive Probability (MAP) score, in which stranding was re-evaluated by computed tomography (CT) number, for predicting operation time in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN).
methodsThe study participants were 119 patients who underwent transperitoneal RAPN. With regard to stranding, ROIs were evaluated, and the mean CT numbers were assigned a score ranging from 0 to 3. Clinical variables were evaluated in a multivariate logistic regression analysis in relation to prolonged operation time.
resultsThe percentage of patients with score ≥ 3 by MAP score alone was significantly higher than those of patients with score ≥ 3 by ROI-modified MAP score alone (26.8% vs. 13.4%, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed no independent association with the MAP score. On the other hand, for ROI-modified MAP score, score ≥ 3 was an independent factor for prolonged operation time (OR = 4.28, p = 0.0032) along with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 22 (OR = 4.46, p = 0.01), R.E.N.A.L. nephrometry score ≥ 7 (OR = 4.12, p = 0.0047), posterior tumor location (OR = 2.85, p = 0.036), and clinical T stage ≥ 1b (OR = 6.19, p = 0.0044). Regarding the predictive performance, the accuracy of the ROI-modified MAP score was significantly higher than the MAP score (area under the curve [AUC] value: 0.652 vs. 0.721, p = 0.034).
conclusionThe ROI-modified MAP score was a more relevant factor regarding operation time, suggesting that it might be a better preoperative predictor.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39755802What 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.