ArticleBMC urology2026
Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for multiple ipsilateral renal tumours: surgical, functional and oncological outcomes.
Article in BMC urology, 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
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for the treatment of multiple ipsilateral renal tumours (MIRT). The primary outcomes were perioperative results, including the rate of postoperative complications and 'Trifecta' achievement. The secondary outcomes included renal functional preservation and oncological survival.
methodsWe retrospectively analysed the data of patients with MIRT who underwent LPN or RAPN between 2010 and 2024. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed to adjust for potential baseline confounders, resulting in a final matched cohort of 19 patients per group. Perioperative data and functional, oncological, and survival outcomes were reviewed.
resultsIn the matched cohort, the RAPN group was associated with significantly fewer postoperative complications (10.5% vs. 47.4%, P = 0.029). Notably, 88.9% (8/9) of the complications in the LPN group were Clavien-Dindo grade I. The RAPN group also showed a higher 'Trifecta' rate (63.2% vs. 21.1%, P = 0.020) and shorter postoperative hospital stay (4 vs. 6 days; P = 0.044). At 12 months postoperatively, the RAPN group demonstrated significantly lower absolute (9.1 vs. 18.4 µmol/L, P = 0.041) and percentage changes (12.0% vs. 25.9%, P = 0.024) in serum creatinine (Scr). No significant differences were identified in disease-free survival (P = 0.386), cancer-specific survival (P = 0.678), or overall survival (P = 0.116).
conclusionsFor patients with MIRT, RAPN demonstrates superior perioperative results and better preservation of renal function compared to LPN. These findings support the use of robotics as the preferred minimally invasive strategy for complex cases with two ipsilateral renal lesions, potentially enhancing surgical safety and functional outcomes.
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.