SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
Comparison of intraoperative and postoperative outcomes between open and robotic-assisted kidney transplantation: a meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Global trends and hotspots in robot-assisted kidney transplantation: A bibliometric and visualization analysis based on CiteSpace.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Review
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
Renal transplantation is the best option for end-stage renal disease, and in this study, patients who underwent robotic-assisted renal transplantation (RAKT) and open renal transplantation (OKT) were selected to compare their intraoperative and postoperative clinical outcomes: including Operation Time, Length of Stay, WIT (warm ischaemia time), CIT (cold ischaemia time), Estimated Blood Loss, Post 1 month Creatinine, Incision Length, Rewarming Time, Wound infection. The study was registered in PROSPERO with CRD code: CRD420251061084. We searched in Web of Science, Pubmed, Wiely, Elsevier databases, screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria and finally included 7 papers. The quality of the included literature was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, and the intraoperative and postoperative clinical outcomes were analysed using StataMP 16, with forest plots drawn, and we analysed heterogeneity; sensitivity analyses were carried out using the one-by-one exclusion method, publication bias analyses were performed using the Egger test, and subgroup analyses were carried out for the operation time. RAKT has less Estimated Blood Loss: SMD (95% CI) was -0.577 (-0.755,0.399), I
Indexed as
Identifiers
40928537What 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.