Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42663715›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2026

Robotic versus open post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection: a propensity score matched study across 11 academic medical centers.

Julian Chavarriaga, Alireza Ghoreifi, Eshetu G Atenafu, Ahmad Mousa, Lynn Anson-Cartwright, Sanchit Kaushal, Farshad Sheybaee Moghaddam, Anirban P Mitra, Ashish Khanna, Amitabh Singh and 21 more

Abstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of 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.

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

31 authors.

Julian ChavarriagaDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada. chavarriagajulian@gmail.com.
Alireza GhoreifiInstitute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Eshetu G AtenafuDepartment of Biostatistics, University Health Network, and Division of Biostatistics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Ahmad MousaDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lynn Anson-CartwrightDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Sanchit KaushalDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Farshad Sheybaee MoghaddamInstitute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Anirban P MitraDepartment of Urology and Department of Computational Biomedicine, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Ashish KhannaDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
Amitabh SinghDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
Sol C MoonDepartment of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Ahmed Saeed GoolamDepartment of Urology, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, Australia.
Ryan ChuangSwedish Medical Group, Seattle, WA, USA.
Jordan RichDepartment of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA.
Fady BakyDepartment of Urology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA.
Mathew HoDepartment of Surgery, Section of Urology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Jacob RobertsDepartment of Urology, UC San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA.
Inderbir S GillInstitute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Reza MehrazinDepartment of Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
John SfakianosDepartment of Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
James PorterSwedish Medical Group, Seattle, WA, USA.
Soroush Rais-BahramiDepartment of Urology, University of Alabama at Birmingham Heersink School of Medicine, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Aditya BagrodiaDepartment of Urology, UC San Diego School of Medicine, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA.
Nariman AhmadiDepartment of Urology, Chris O'Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, Australia.
Scott EggenerDepartment of Surgery, Section of Urology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Jacob TallmanDepartment of Surgery, Section of Urology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Sudhir RawalDepartment of Uro-Oncology, Rajiv Gandhi Cancer Institute and Research Centre, New Delhi, India.
John F WardDepartment of Urology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Michael JewettDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Hooman DjaladatInstitute of Urology, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Robert J HamiltonDivision of Urology, Department of Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare perioperative and survival outcomes of patients undergoing robotic versus open post-chemotherapy retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (PC-RPLND) for testicular cancer. MATERIALS AND

methodsAnalyzing data from patients who underwent PC-RPLND at eleven academic centres between 1990 and 2023, we used propensity score matching (PSM) to create a 1:1 (open-RPLND: robotic-RPLND) matched cohort. The primary endpoint was time to relapse. Secondary endpoints included operative time, length of stay, estimated blood loss, and surgical complications. Relapse free survival rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier methodology, and Cox proportional hazards model was used to compare perioperative outcomes between robotic vs. open PC-RPLND after adjusting for template and pathology.

resultsA total of 134 robotic cases were propensity score matched to 134 open cases. At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, estimated relapse-free survival at 3 years was similar between robotic and open PC-RPLND (92.8% vs. 88.5%, p = 0.18). Relapse occurred in 5.2% (robotic) vs. 12.3% (open), with most relapses occurring within the first year. Robotic PC-RPLND was associated with lower blood loss, length of hospital stay, and fewer complications (16.4% vs. 32.1%), including a 0% rate of ileus compared to 12.7% in the open group. Lymph node yield and rates of viable tumor were comparable between approaches. The main limitation of this study was its retrospective nature.

conclusionThis is the first multicenter study to compare open versus robotic PC-RPLND using a PSM system. With appropriate patient selection and surgical experience at academic centers specializing in testicular cancer care, robotic PC-RPLND offers low morbidity and improved perioperative outcomes while maintaining the similar oncological outcomes, compared to the open approach.

Indexed as

Lymph Node ExcisionNeoplasms, Germ Cell and EmbryonalRobotic Surgical ProceduresTesticular NeoplasmsAcademic Medical CentersAdultHumansMalePropensity ScoreRetroperitoneal SpaceRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateChemotherapyNon-seminomatous germ-cell tumoursRetroperitoneal lymph node dissection: robotic surgerySeminomaTesticular cancer

Identifiers

PMID42663715

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.