Trial reportJournal of robotic surgery2026
Prospective randomized trial of abdominal versus lumbar extraction incisions after retroperitoneal laparoscopic left nephrectomy in living donors.
Trial report in Journal of robotic surgery, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe optimal specimen extraction site after retroperitoneal laparoscopic donor nephrectomy is debated. This study compared abdominal versus lumbar incisions on hernia risk, motor function, and quality of life.
methodsThis prospective, single-blind RCT, 240 living kidney donors were randomized 1:1 to an abdominal diagonal or a lumbar horizontal extraction incision. Primary outcomes were incisional hernia incidence at 12 months (verified by ultrasound) and abdominal wall motor function deficits at 6 months (measured by dynamometry and surface electromyography). Secondary outcomes included sensory disturbances, pain, analgesic requirements, and SF-36 scores.
resultsOf 240 randomized donors, 234 completed 12-month follow-up (117 abdominal, 117 lumbar group). Incisional hernia occurred in 3 patients (2.6%) in the abdominal group versus 9 patients (7.7%) in the lumbar group (relative risk 0.33, 95% CI 0.09-1.19, p = 0.086, non-significant). Motor function deficits were significantly lower in the abdominal group (mean difference - 12.4 N·m, 95% CI -18.6 to -6.2, p < 0.001). Visual analog scale pain scores at 24 h were 3.2 ± 1.4 in the abdominal versus 4.8 ± 1.6 in the lumbar group (p < 0.001). Total morphine equivalent consumption within 72 h was 32.5 ± 12.3 mg versus 48.6 ± 15.7 mg respectively (p < 0.001). SF-36 physical functioning scores at 12 months were significantly higher in the abdominal group (88.4 ± 9.2 vs. 82.1 ± 11.3, p < 0.001).
conclusionAbdominal extraction incisions demonstrated potentially advantageous outcomes including lower incisional hernia rates, reduced motor function deficits, decreased postoperative pain, and improved long-term quality of life compared to lumbar incisions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41673351What 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.