Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39791581›Full record

ArticleInvestigative and clinical urology2025

Robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction for managing kidney transplant patients with ureteric complications.

Dongho Shin, San Kang, Seung Ah Rhew, Chang Eil Yoon, Hyong Woo Moon, Yong Hyun Park, Hyuk Jin Cho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Investigative and clinical urology, 2025. 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Dongho ShinDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-8496-8825
San KangDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0009-0009-9417-3685
Seung Ah RhewDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0009-0002-6903-034X
Chang Eil YoonDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-6089-1728
Hyong Woo MoonDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9352-3411
Yong Hyun ParkDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-4860-6127
Hyuk Jin ChoDepartment of Urology, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea. hyukjincho0403@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-2599-2950

Funding

NRF 2022R1A2C1092876
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo evaluate the feasibility of robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction as a minimally invasive alternative to open surgery for managing ureteric complications in transplanted kidneys. MATERIALS AND

methodsFrom January 2020 to December 2023, robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction was performed on fifteen kidney transplant patients with vesicoureteral reflux (VUR) or ureteral stricture who had previously failed endoscopic treatments.

resultsTwelve females and three males, with a mean age of 48.6±6.6 years, were included in the study. Nine patients (60.0%) underwent surgery due to VUR (grade III or higher) of the transplanted kidney, and six patients (40.0%) had transplanted ureteral strictures. Postoperative voiding cystourethrogram (VCUG) was performed at 3.2±1.6 months. Seven patients (77.8%) became VUR-free, while two patients (22.2%) had VUR regression from grade IV to I. All six patients who underwent reconstruction due to anastomosis site stricture became stenosis-free without the need for an indwelling ureteral catheter. In cases where the ureter was too short for reimplantation, a Boari flap or end-to-end anastomosis with the native ureter was performed. The mean hospital stay was 5.9±4.5 days. The urethral catheter was removed after 15.1±5.4 days, and the ureteral catheter was removed after 4.9±1.5 weeks. The mean follow-up period was 23.9±6.8 months, with no additional interventions required after surgery. No complications above Clavien-Dindo grade I were recorded.

conclusionsRobotic ureteral reconstruction is technically feasible and offers an effective, minimally invasive treatment for ureteric complications in kidney transplant patients, serving as an alternative to open surgery.

Indexed as

Feasibility StudiesKidney TransplantationPostoperative ComplicationsRobotic Surgical ProceduresUreterAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPlastic Surgery ProceduresRetrospective StudiesUreteral ObstructionUrologic Surgical ProceduresVesico-Ureteral RefluxKidney transplantationObstruction, ureteralRobot-assisted surgeryVesicoureteral reflux

Identifiers

PMID39791581
PMCPMC11729223

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.