ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
A two-centre experience with hand-assisted laparoscopic, transperitoneal laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic adrenalectomy.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMinimally invasive adrenalectomy is the current standard of care for most adrenal lesions. Several techniques exist-transperitoneal laparoscopic (TL), retroperitoneoscopic (RP), hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL), and robotic adrenalectomy.
methodsPerioperative outcomes of 444 patients undergoing HAL (n = 85), TL (n = 291) and RP (n = 68) adrenalectomies across two tertiary institutions between 2009 and 2025 were retrospectively analysed.
resultsThe HAL approach was employed for larger tumours (median 6.5 cm [range 0.8-17.5]) than TL (3.4 cm [0.12-12.5]) and RP (3.8 cm [0.6-13.0]) and was associated with shorter operative times (median 124 min [65-287] vs. 216 min [124-465] vs. 141 min [50-318], respectively). However, HAL demonstrated higher overall postoperative complication rates (16.5% [95% CI 9.3-26.1] vs. 7.6% [95% CI 4.8-11.2] vs. 8.8% [95% CI 3.3-18.2]). Pheochromocytomas were more commonly managed using HAL (31.8%) and TL (27.5%), whereas non-functioning adenomas predominated in RP (23.5%). Malignancies were also more frequently treated with HAL (20 vs. 9.3 vs. 8.8%). Conversion to open surgery occurred in 5.9% (95% CI 1.9-13.2) of HAL cases due to haemorrhage and local invasion, and in 5.8% (95% CI 3.4-9.2) of TL cases due to haemorrhage, difficult dissection, and unclear anatomy. In RP, 4.4% (95% CI 0.9-12.4) required conversion to HAL for technical difficulty. Intraoperative complications included splenic injury (HAL 3.5%, TL 0.3%) and renal artery injury in RP (1.5%). Two perioperative deaths were recorded with TL (0.7%) approach. Median hospital stay was longer following HAL (6 vs. 4 vs. 4 days) technique.
conclusionIn this series, one of the largest to our knowledge, HAL provides an effective hybrid minimally invasive technique for larger, more complex adrenal lesions and malignancy, whereas TL and RP are effective for smaller, benign tumours. The RP approach was associated with fewer postoperative complications and shorter hospital stay.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42806085What 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.