Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42099840›Full record

ArticleIndian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India

Surgery in stage IIA/IIB seminoma: A "Living systematic review" and meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Akash Mor, Akash Pawar, Hetakshi Shah, Amandeep Arora, Ankit Misra, Mahendra Pal, Mufaddal Kazi, Aditya Bagrodia, Gagan Prakash

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Akash MorDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Akash PawarDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Hetakshi ShahDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Amandeep AroraDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Ankit MisraDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Mahendra PalDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Mufaddal KaziDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Aditya BagrodiaDepartment of Urology and Radiation Medicine and Applied Sciences, University of California, San Diego, California.
Gagan PrakashDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital and Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Concerns about the long-term toxicity of chemotherapy and radiotherapy in stage II seminoma have renewed the interest in the surgical management. Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) has emerged as a potential treatment alternative. This systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) evaluates the oncological, functional, and peri-operative outcomes of RPLND in stage II seminoma. Methods: A SRMA (systematic review and meta-analysis) of prospective studies was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies included prospective trials assessing RPLND in stage II seminoma. Outcomes analyzed were relapse-free survival (RFS), recurrence patterns, functional outcomes, and peri-operative complications. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle--Ottawa Scale. The review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420250559629). Results: Four prospective phase II studies with 216 patients were included. The pooled 2-year RFS was 85% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 77.8%--92.2%). In-field recurrence occurred in 5.5%, while the rate of out-of-field recurrence was 10.1%. Preservation of antegrade ejaculation was achieved in 92.8% (95% CI: 87.4%--98.1%). Major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ IIIA) were reported in 9.6% of the patients. Risk of bias was low to moderate across the studies. Conclusions: Primary RPLND is a feasible and safe treatment for carefully selected patients with stage II seminoma, providing favorable oncological control, high rates of functional preservation, and acceptable morbidity. While short-term outcomes are encouraging, long-term follow-up and randomized comparisons with conventional therapy are required to establish its definitive role.

Identifiers

PMID42099840
PMCPMC13148841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.