Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25829876›Full record

ArticleOchsner journal2015

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: decreasing length of stay.

Ari J Cohen, Darin S Williams, Humberto Bohorquez, David S Bruce, Ian C Carmody, Trevor Reichman, George E Loss

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC
In one paragraph

Article in Ochsner journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Is Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy Like Riding a Bike?Kidney international reports · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Current practice of live donor nephrectomy in Turkey.World journal of transplantation · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Past, present and future of urological robotic surgery.Investigative and clinical urology · 2016
    Review
  20. Article
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

7 authors.

Ari J CohenMulti-Organ Transplant Institute, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA ; The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA.
Darin S WilliamsTulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA.
Humberto BohorquezMulti-Organ Transplant Institute, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA ; The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA.
David S BruceMulti-Organ Transplant Institute, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA ; The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA.
Ian C CarmodyMulti-Organ Transplant Institute, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA ; The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA.
Trevor ReichmanMulti-Organ Transplant Institute, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA.
George E LossMulti-Organ Transplant Institute, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA ; The University of Queensland School of Medicine, Ochsner Clinical School, New Orleans, LA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe number of robotic operations performed with the da Vinci Surgical System has increased during the past decade. This system allows for greater maneuverability and control than hand-assisted laparoscopic procedures, resulting in less tissue manipulation and irritation.

methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the results of 100 consecutive robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies and compared them to our most recent 20 hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies.

resultsBetween May 2008 and June 2012, 120 laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were performed at Ochsner Clinic Foundation. Of those, 100 live kidney donors underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies. Surgical time and hospital length of stay improved after the first 20 patients receiving robotic-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomies, which was considered the learning curve. Sixty percent of patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomies were released on postoperative day 1 compared to 45% of patients who underwent hand-assisted laparoscopic techniques.

conclusionIn our experience, robotic-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy resulted in decreased postoperative length of stay that decreased the global cost of the procedure and allowed our institution to admit more patients.

Indexed as

Kidney transplantationlaparoscopyliving donorsnephrectomyroboticstissue and organ procurement

Identifiers

PMID25829876
PMCPMC4365841

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.