ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2025
Comparative Outcomes of Robot-Assisted vs Traditional Laparoscopic Ureteral Reimplantation for Lower Ureteral Stenosis: A Single Center Study.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 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.
- Robotic-assisted ureteric reimplantation versus laparoscopic and open approaches: systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Single-center results from the first 100 robotic ureteral reimplantation in children: analysis of learning curve effects.Frontiers in 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Robot-assisted laparoscopic ureteral bladder reimplantation (RALUR) has shown fewer operative and postoperative complications than traditional laparoscopic ureteral reimplantation (LUR) in treating ureteral stenosis. This study from a single center aimed to compare clinical outcomes from RALUR and LUR in treating 34 lower ureteral stenosis patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS Clinical data [visual analogue scale (VAS), complications, glomerular filtration rate (GFR), degree of pelvis separation, and degree of ureteral dilation] from lower ureteral stenosis patients treated with RALUR (n=14) and LUR (n=20) from January 2019 to January 2023 were analyzed. RESULTS Operation time (P=0.025) and postoperative hemoglobin decline (P=0.003) in the RALUR group were significantly lower than in the LUR group. Postoperative drainage tube removal time (P<0.001) and postoperative hospital stay (P=0.017) in the RALUR group were significantly shorter than in the LUR group. The total hospitalization cost of RALUR was significantly higher than that of LUR (P<0.001). There were no differences in postoperative VAS and complications between the 2 groups (P=0.58/P=1.000). Renal pelvis separation length (P<0.001) and degree of ureteral dilation (P<0.001) of the affected side were reduced in the RALUR group at 6 months postoperation, and GFR was significantly improved (P<0.001). In the LUR group, separation of the affected renal pelvis (P<0.001) and degree of ureteral dilation (P<0.001) were significantly reduced 6 months postoperation. The degree of renal pelvis separation in the RALUR group was significantly greater than in the LUR group (P=0.030), but the difference in degree of ureteral dilation (P=0.084) and affected kidney GFR (P=0.928) between the 2 groups was not significant. CONCLUSIONS Compared with LUR, RALUR has advantages of less bleeding, shorter operation time, higher safety, shorter postoperative hospital stay, faster recovery, less perioperative complications, and a more precise curative effect.
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.