ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
A comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical nephrectomy with tumor thrombectomy from the intercontinental collaboration on renal cell carcinoma.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robot‑assisted versus open radical nephrectomy and venous tumor thrombectomy: perioperative and oncologic outcomes-an inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis.Surgical endoscopy · 2026Article
- Review
- Global research trends and clinical theme evolution in robot-assisted nephrectomy with venous tumor thrombectomy for renal cell carcinoma: a bibliometric and visualization analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Review
- Reviewing the Current State of Renal Cell Carcinoma with a Tumor Thrombus: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, Metastasis, and Systemic Therapy.Current urology reports · 2025Review
- Comparing Cytoreductive Nephrectomy with Tumor Thrombectomy Between Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Approaches.Cancers · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
23 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The gold standard treatment for renal cell carcinoma with a tumor thrombus (RCC-TT) is radical nephrectomy with tumor thrombectomy (RN-TT). Operative approaches to this can be done open (ORN-TT), laparoscopic (LRN-TT), or robotic (RRN-TT). The purpose of this study was to compare overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and metastasis-free survival (MFS) between open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches to RN-TT using the Intercontinental Collaboration on Renal Cell Carcinoma (ICORCC) database. Patient records were reviewed from the ICORCC database. All patients included in the study underwent RN-TT for RCC-TT from 1999 to present. Tumor thrombus level was graded using the Neves classification system. Statistical analysis was carried out using analysis of variance, chi-squared test, and Kaplan-Meier survival curves with log-rank test to compare outcomes by surgical approach. A total of 392 patients were included. There were 308 ORN-TT, 61 LRN-TT, and 23 RRN-TT cases. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, OS and CSS were not significantly different by approach (p > 0.05). MFS was significantly lower in RRN-TT patients (p = 0.030). Operative time was the longest in ORN-TT, followed by LRN-TT, and RRN-TT the quickest (p = 0.011). Blood transfusion rates were significantly lower in RRN-TT relative to ORN-TT (p < 0.001). Rates of lymph node dissection, soft tissue margin positivity, and cytoreductive surgery were alike (p > 0.05). There is no definitive superiority of one operative approach compared to another. RRN-TT may result in worse MFS for patients, which calls for further investigation, but this is not certain. Ultimately, the risks, benefits, and resources the surgeon has at his/her disposal should all play in the final operative choice of RN-TT for the patient.
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.