ArticleInternational braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
Arterial Embolization versus Robotic Partial Nephrectomy for the Treatment of Renal Angiomyolipomas.
Article in International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Once again, the highlight of this edition (November-December 2026) of International Brazilian Journal of Urology is robotic surgery.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the outcomes of robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RALPN) and selective arterial embolization (SAE) for the treatment of sporadic renal angiomyolipoma (AML). PATIENTS AND
methodsThe outcomes of patients who were managed by RALPN (n = 191) or SAE (n = 51) for sporadic renal AML were matched (2:1) using a propensity score for analyses. The primary endpoint was therapeutic success defined as the absence of secondary treatment. Secondary endpoints were post-operative complications and renal function preservation (loss of eGFR at 6 months). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to predict factors associated with re-intervention.
resultsPatients baseline characteristics in the matched population (RALP, n=96 vs. SAE, n=48) were balanced. LOS was shorter (mean: 4.2 vs. 3.1 days; p = 0.004) and EBL was lower (327 mL vs. 0 mL, p < 0.0001) in the SAE group. Overall (PN: 15.2% vs. AES: 11.7% p = 0.09) and Clavien-Dindo stratified (p = 0.62) complications were similar in both groups. After a comparable mean follow-up time (33 vs. 40 months, p = 0.63), there was an overall mean loss of eGFR of 7.7±26 mL/min/1.73m2 (p = 0.001). This loss was similar between the two groups (PN: 6.87±26 vs. AES: 11.56±23, p = 0.36). After adjusting for identified confounding factors including tumor size, type of primary intervention (RALPN vs SAE) was the only predictive factor for secondary intervention.
conclusionRALPN was associated with decreased need for secondary treatment with no increase in morbidity compared with SAE.
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.