SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for hilar versus non-hilar renal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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
Abstract
We conducted this comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess surgical outcomes, kidney function preservation, and cancer control efficacy when comparing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) outcomes between renal hilar masses and peripherally located tumors. We performed an exhaustive search strategy utilizing four major electronic databases to capture all relevant comparative investigations published up to August 2025. Meta-analytical calculations were executed through Review Manager (RevMan) version 5.4 software platform. Our investigation synthesized data from eight research studies, including 7064 participants (1292 presenting hilar masses, 5772 with peripheral lesions). Comparative analysis revealed that RAPN procedures for hilar lesions demonstrated significantly longer surgical duration (WMD 22.18 min, 95% CI 16.86 to 27.51; p < 0.00001), greater intraoperative hemorrhage (WMD 31.66 ml, 95% CI 10.10 to 53.21; p = 0.004), higher blood transfusion requirements (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.49; p = 0.009), prolonged renal clamping duration (WMD 4.89 min, 95% CI 2.80 to 6.97; p < 0.00001), increased severe adverse events (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.01; p = 0.03), and diminished probability of optimal surgical outcomes (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.84; p = 0.01). However, both patient cohorts exhibited equivalent outcomes regarding hospitalization duration, total adverse events, surgical approach conversion frequencies to open procedures or radical nephrectomy, postoperative kidney function deterioration, positive surgical margin (PSM), and tumor recurrence patterns, showing no statistically meaningful disparities. While technically more demanding and associated with increased perioperative morbidity, RAPN for hilar tumors is a safe and effective procedure that provides crucial renal functional and oncological outcomes comparable to those of RAPN for non-hilar tumors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41699371What 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.