ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2025
Reassessment of T1a cutoff for kidney cancer in the robotic era.
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. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In 2002, the renal cancer T classification was revised by dividing T1 into T1a and T1b at a 4 cm cutoff. However, local treatment using minimally invasive procedures resulted in better outcomes for tumors smaller than 3 cm, leading the European Association of Urology guideline committee to propose a 3 cm cutoff for T1a/b. Nonetheless, the impact of changing the T1 cutoff on robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RALPN) has not been fully investigated. This study included 300 out of 335 patients with clinical stage T1 disease who underwent RALPN at our institution between November 2013 and April 2024. We evaluated the discriminative performance of clinical outcomes in each group using tumor diameter cutoffs of 4 and 3 cm. Using a 3 cm cutoff, patients with tumors ≥ 3 cm showed a greater decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (e.g., the change from baseline to 1-year follow-up) ( - 9.6% vs. - 4.9%, p = 0.003) and a higher incidence of overall complications (25% vs. 15%, p = 0.040) compared to those with smaller tumors. With a 4 cm cutoff, differences in eGFR decline ( - 7.8% vs. - 6.7%, p = 0.134) and overall complications (27% vs. 17%, p = 0.100) were not significant. The 3 cm cutoff more accurately predicted overall complications with a higher area under the curve (0.575 vs. 0.451, p = 0.037). A 3 cm cutoff for the T classification of kidney cancer may more accurately predict postoperative renal function and the risk of complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40940584What 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.