ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology
Robotic reconstruction for benign upper urinary tract obstruction: a review of the current literature.
Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ureteroscopy-assisted techniques in laparoscopic repair of middle and lower ureteral stenosis: A retrospective comparative study.SAGE open medicine · 2026Article
- Surgical success following robotic upper urinary tract reconstruction, results from a global network of healthcare organizations.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Robotic upper urinary tract reconstruction for ureteral stricture: a single-center series.Journal of robotic surgery · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The field of reconstructive urology has seen a paradigm shift in the surgical approach for intra-abdominal cases, resulting in an increased preference for minimally invasive techniques. The introduction of the surgical robot has led to exponential growth in innovative approaches, reflecting the ongoing efforts to improve patient outcomes and address the limitations of open and laparoscopic surgery. This review article summarizes the knowledge gained in the last 10 years about adult robotic ureteral reconstruction. A non-systematic literature review was conducted on February 18, 2024 using Medline, PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase libraries. Studies published in English since 2014 reporting at least five robotic ureteral reconstructive cases for the management of benign ureteral obstruction in adults were included. A narrative review focusing on robotic ureteral reconstructive techniques, their associated success and complication rates, and how the robotic approach compares to open and laparoscopic reconstruction was performed. The current literature demonstrates increased utilization of the robotic platform in reconstructive urological procedures. Robotic surgery has been shown to be associated with shorter learning curves, lower surgeon fatigue, better visualization and equivalent results to those seen with laparoscopic surgery. While the literature is limited by a lack of comparative data, well-designed randomized controlled trials, and standardized criteria for defining and measuring success, this review demonstrates the safety, feasibility, and efficacy of robotic ureteral reconstruction for managing benign ureteral strictures, confirming it as a viable alternative to open and laparoscopic surgery.
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.