ReviewArab journal of urology2018
Laparoscopic and hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Arab journal of urology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open nephrectomy for live kidney donors.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of Surgical Techniques in Living Donor Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis.Annals of transplantation · 2020Pooled it
- Implementation of a pediatric kidney transplantation program in Uzbekistan: Feasibility and early outcomes.World journal of transplantation · 2025Article
- A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Antibiotic Prophylaxis versus No Antibiotic Prophylaxis for Postoperative Infectious Complications for Hand-assisted Laparoscopic Donor Nephrectomy.Annals of surgery open : perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches · 2025Article
- Article
- Robotic-Assisted Nephrectomy for Living Kidney Donation-Single Center Initial Experience (Case Series) and Review of the Literature.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Knowledge, attitude, and practice toward postoperative self-management among kidney transplant recipients.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy: 1864 cases in 15 years of experience.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the perioperative outcomes of hand-assisted laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (HALDN) and pure LDN, as HALDN and LDN are the two most widely used techniques of DN to treat end-stage renal disease.
methodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we performed a literature search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane from 01/01/1995 to 31/12/2014. The primary outcome was conversion to an open procedure. Secondary outcomes were warm ischaemia time (WIT), operation time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, and length of stay (LOS). Data analysed were presented as odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs),
resultsThere were 24 studies included in the meta-analysis; three randomised controlled trials (RCTs), one randomised pilot study, two prospective, and 18 retrospective cohort studies. There were no differences in conversion to an open procedure between the two techniques for both RCTs (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.06, 2.90;
conclusionThere is little statistical evidence to recommend one technique. HALDN is associated with a shorter WIT and OT. LDN has equal safety to HALDN. Further studies are required.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.