Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40524689›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2025

Robot-assisted Management of Complex Ureteral Stenosis in Kidney Transplant Patients: Multicenter Case Series and Description of Surgical Techniques.

Joris Vangeneugden, Federico Lavagno, Camille Berquin, Liesbeth Desender, Steven Van Laecke, Marco Oderda, Marco Allasia, Alberto Breda, Charles Van Praet, Karel Decaestecker and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Joris VangeneugdenDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, ERN eUROGEN accredited center, Ghent, Belgium.
Federico LavagnoUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Molinette Hospital, Torino, Italy.
Camille BerquinDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, ERN eUROGEN accredited center, Ghent, Belgium.
Liesbeth DesenderFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Steven Van LaeckeFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Marco OderdaUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Molinette Hospital, Torino, Italy.
Marco AllasiaUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Molinette Hospital, Torino, Italy.
Alberto BredaDepartment of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Charles Van PraetDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, ERN eUROGEN accredited center, Ghent, Belgium.
Karel DecaesteckerDepartment of Urology, Ghent University Hospital, ERN eUROGEN accredited center, Ghent, Belgium.
Paolo GonteroUrology Unit, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Torino, Molinette Hospital, Torino, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective: Ureteral stenosis following renal transplantation can occur in up to 10% of patients. Initial management, after kidney drainage, may include endoscopic balloon dilation ± laser incision. In case of recurrence after a primary endourological approach, strictures >1-3 cm, or complex anatomy in transplant patients, ureteral reconstruction should be performed. A robotic approach may reduce morbidity in this fragile population. We describe our case series of robot-assisted surgical treatments for ureteral stenosis in kidney transplant patients. Methods and surgical procedure: We included 29 renal transplant patients who suffered from ureteral stenosis in whom ureteral reconstruction was performed at three referral centers from November 2019 to March 2024. Different approaches were used: ureteroneocystostomy (with or without an antireflux tunnel or a Boari flap), ureteroureterostomy, and pyeloureterostomy using the native ureter (ipsilateral or contralateral). Key findings and limitations: All cases were performed using the Da Vinci Xi robotic system and completed successfully without intraoperative complications. The median pre- and postoperative (3 mo) glomerular filtration rates were 45 (interquartile range [IQR] 31-60) and 46 (IQR 31-58) ml/min, respectively. The median hospital stay was 4 (IQR 3-6) d. Postoperative complications were limited (21% Clavien-Dindo ≤2 and 10% Clavien-Dindo ≥3). Of 29 patients, 28 (97%) were free from nephrostomy or JJ stent at a median follow-up of 18 (IQR 13-34) mo. Our retrospective findings advocate confirmation through prospective data. Conclusions: We demonstrate the safety and feasibility of robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction in kidney transplant patients with ureteral stenosis, allowing high-quality realignment of the urinary tract, quick recovery with a low complication rate, and good preservation of renal function in this fragile population. Patient summary: We demonstrate several robot-assisted ureteral reconstruction options for kidney transplant patients suffering from ureteral stenosis. We found these techniques to be safe and effective, with low complication rates and good preservation of the renal function.

Indexed as

Minimally invasive surgeryRenal transplantRobotic surgeryUreteral stricture

Identifiers

PMID40524689
PMCPMC12169748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.