ReviewInternational urology and nephrology2026
From Lumbotomy to Robotic surgery: Narrative review of comparative studies of Surgical techniques in living donor nephrectomy.
Review in International urology and nephrology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Living donor nephrectomy (LDN) is a cornerstone of renal transplantation, enabling transplantation in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) without the pain of being on a waiting list. Surgical techniques for living donor nephrectomy have evolved from open donor nephrectomy (ODN) to minimally invasive approaches, including laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (LDN), hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN), and robot-assisted donor nephrectomy (RADN). This review evaluated and compared the outcomes of these techniques across five categories: donor outcomes, recipient graft outcomes, perioperative metrics, cost and accessibility, and long-term donor satisfaction. Current evidence supports a shift toward minimally invasive methods as the gold standard, with laparoscopic techniques demonstrating superior donor recovery profiles and equivalent graft outcomes compared to open surgery. However, emerging techniques such as RADN require further research owing to cost and learning curve limitations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40531351What 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.