ReviewCureus2025
Laparoscopic Resection in the Management of Non-adrenal and Non-renal Retroperitoneal Tumors: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Article
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
Retroperitoneal tumors (RPTs) are rare, often presenting late due to their deep anatomical location. Complete surgical excision remains the mainstay of treatment. While open surgery is traditional, advances in minimally invasive techniques have expanded laparoscopic resection to selected non-adrenal, non-renal RPTs. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases up to August 1, 2025. Eligible studies included adults undergoing laparoscopic resection for large-volume, non-adrenal, non-renal RPTs, reporting perioperative outcomes. Data extraction and ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) quality assessment were performed. Due to heterogeneity, results were synthesized narratively without meta-analysis. Across all included studies, laparoscopic RPT resection demonstrated favorable perioperative outcomes, with a few studies directly comparing it to open surgery and reporting superior perioperative results. Operative time varied, with some reports showing longer durations laparoscopically, though learning curves reduced times substantially. Blood loss was consistently lower in the laparoscopic group, often eliminating the need for transfusions. Complication rates were low, and conversion to open surgery was infrequent. Hospital stays were shorter with earlier ambulation and diet resumption in laparoscopic cases. Feasibility was highest in early-stage and benign tumors, with high completion rates. Oncologic outcomes were comparable, with low recurrence rates in well-selected patients. These findings support the safety, efficacy, and minimally invasive advantages of laparoscopic management for RPTs in appropriately selected cases. Laparoscopic RPT resection offers reduced morbidity, faster recovery, and comparable oncologic outcomes compared to open surgery, making it a safe and effective option in selected patients and experienced surgical settings.
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.