ReviewQatar medical journal2025
Surgical Strategies in Renal Cancer: A Meta-analysis of Partial vs. Radical Nephrectomy Outcomes Across Tumor Stages.
Review in Qatar medical journal, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Surgical intervention remains the primary treatment for localized renal tumors and masses, with partial nephrectomy (PN) and radical nephrectomy (RN) being the two most frequently employed procedures. The choice between these approaches is often influenced by factors such as tumor size, location, histology, and patient comorbidities. However, the decision between PN and RN remains a subject of ongoing debate, particularly as emerging evidence suggests varying outcomes based on the stage and type of renal tumors. This meta-analysis evaluates the association between renal tumor stage and subtype with the outcomes of PN and RN, focusing on renal function, cancer-specific survival, and postoperative complications. Method: An exhaustive search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases, covering the literature from their inception up to March 2023, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Original studies comparing PN to RN in the management of renal tumors at various stages were meticulously screened, adhering to stringent inclusion and exclusion criteria. This protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023455985). Result: Overall, 38 cohort studies were included, with a total of 144,608 patients diagnosed with renal cancer who underwent nephrectomy, 71,582 who underwent PN, and 72,671 who underwent RN. The data revealed a significant difference in cancer-specific survival between PN and RN, which was higher in the RN group (pooled HR: 1.17; 95% CI = 1.01-1.35) Conclusion: Across various tumor stages, RN demonstrates superior cancer-specific survival, and a lower incidence of postoperative complications compared to PN. However, PN is associated with more favorable renal function preservation. These findings, in conjunction with individual patient characteristics, should be meticulously evaluated to inform the selection of the most appropriate surgical approach and guide patient counseling.
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.