ArticleUrologia internationalis2026
Intraoperative Doppler Verification of Arterial Occlusion in Minimally Invasive Renal Resection.
Article in Urologia internationalis, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDoppler ultrasonography (DUSG) enables intraoperative assessment of renal perfusion during partial nephrectomy. This study evaluated the feasibility of DUSG and compared its outcomes with indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence imaging and a control group (CG) without intraoperative perfusion imaging.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 426 patients undergoing minimally invasive partial nephrectomy between 2018 and July 2025. Ischemia verification was performed using DUSG in 174 patients (41%) and ICG in 29 patients (7%). The CG included 223 patients (52%). Selection of imaging modality depended on the surgeon's preference and intraoperative findings. Perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and chi-square tests.
resultsNo significant differences were observed in tumor size, BMI, warm ischemia time, blood loss, RENAL score, or complication severity assessed by the Clavien-Dindo classification. Selective clamping and clamp adjustment were significantly more frequent in the DUSG and ICG groups compared with controls (both p < 0.001). Positive surgical margin rates were low and comparable between groups.
conclusionBoth DUSG and ICG represent safe and effective methods for ischemia verification; however, DUSG offers the advantages of lower cost, wider availability, and no risk of contrast-related adverse reactions, making it a practical option for routine clinical use.
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.