ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2025
Open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma Comparing outcomes and the tetrafecta as a composite marker of surgery quality.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Laparoscopic versus robot-assisted nephroureterectomy for management of upper-tract urothelial carcinoma.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Template-based pelvic lymph node dissection during lateral decubitus-positioned total retroperitoneal laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy: a step-by-step description of a surgical technique.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe purpose of this study was to compare surgical outcomes and costs between robotic radical nephroureterectomy (RNU), laparoscopic radical nephroureterectomy (LNU), and open radical nephroureterectomy (ONU), and to assess the relevance of the tetrafecta as a composite outcome on survival parameters after nephroureterectomy (NU).
methodsOperative and oncologic followup data was retrospectively collected on patients who underwent NU from 2006-2022 at our institution. The tetrafecta was defined as a true bladder cuff, lymph node dissection, negative surgical margins, and no postoperative complications. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to assess the impact of surgical approach on survival outcomes.
resultsA total of 248 patients were included in the analysis (145 RNU, 61 LNU, and 42 ONU). The complication rate differed by approach and was lowest in RNU (p<0.01). Cancer-specific survival (CSS) differed between ONU and RNU patients, with ONU patients 2.51 times as likely to die from their cancer. Retroperitoneal recurrence-free survival (RPFS) differed between ONU and RNU patients, with ONU patients 7.22 times more likely to experience a retroperitoneal recurrence (p=0.0013). Variable surgical costs were lower in LNU compared to ONU (p=0.028) and direct inpatient hospital costs were lowest with RNU (p<0.01). Eighty-one patients met criteria for the tetrafecta. RNU patients were more likely to achieve the tetrafecta compared to LNU (p<0.01) and ONU (p<0.01) patients. No differences in survival parameters existed between patients who did and did not achieve the tetrafecta.
conclusionsMost oncologic outcomes after NU do not differ by approach on long-term followup; however, CSS and RPFS appear to differ between RNU and ONU. ONU has traditionally been considered the approach with the lowest cost; however, our analysis demonstrates both RNU and LNU require lower costs than ONU, depending on the cost parameter analyzed. Among all approaches, the tetrafecta is best achieved with RNU.
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.