ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Anatomical landmark-based proportional coordinate localization in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for completely endophytic renal tumors.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAccurate localization of completely endophytic renal tumors remains challenging in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy, and conventional intraoperative ultrasonography is experience-dependent.
objectiveTo evaluate an intraoperative localization technique based on AI-assisted three-dimensional reconstruction and an anatomical landmark-based proportional coordinate system (XYZ).
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 105 patients treated from May 2016 to July 2025. Patients were assigned to the XYZ coordinate-guided localization group (n = 52), using preoperative three-dimensional planning, calculation of the proportional XYZ coordinates, and intraoperative ultrasonographic verification, or the traditional localization group (n = 53), using conventional imaging and intraoperative ultrasonographic scanning. Localization efficiency, perioperative outcomes, and trifecta achievement were compared.
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable. Compared with the traditional localization group, the XYZ coordinate-guided localization group had shorter localization time (225.5 s vs 317.0 s, p < 0.001), higher first-attempt localization success rate (59.62% vs 37.74%, p = 0.025), shorter warm ischemia time (21.73 min vs 27.19 min, p < 0.001), and higher trifecta achievement rate (61.54% vs 24.52%, p < 0.001). Estimated blood loss was lower (105.0 mL vs 130.0 mL, p = 0.035), blood transfusion tended to be reduced (3.85% vs 16.98%, p = 0.052), and acute kidney injury was less frequent (11.54% vs 28.30%, p = 0.032). Multivariable regression confirmed XYZ coordinate-guided localization group was associated with higher odds of achieving the trifecta and shorter warm ischemia time.
conclusionIn the present study, XYZ coordinate-guided localization was associated with shorter intraoperative localization and warm ischemia times and a higher rate of achieving the trifecta than traditional localization. We will conduct prospective multicenter studies to further evaluate its effectiveness and generalizability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42907593What 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.