SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2026
Single-versus multi-port robotic partial nephrectomy: a meta-analytic study of perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes.
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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.
- Robotic partial nephrectomy is inching toward the gold standard for small renal masses-a narrative review.Translational andrology and urology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three databases were searched for studies evaluating SP versus MP RAPN. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences (MD) and binary variables as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Fixed- or random-effects models were applied depending to heterogeneity. Prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted based on propensity-score matching and surgical approach. Fifteen studies comprising 2,689 patients (902 SP and 1,787 MP) were included, predominantly retrospective cohorts, with eight propensity-score–matched analyses. Four studies were of good quality and eleven were fair quality. Compared with MP RAPN, SP RAPN was associated with lower estimated blood loss (MD − 15.72 mL; 95%CI: −23.73 to − 7.71), shorter length of stay (MD − 0.43 days; 95%CI: −0.84 to − 0.20), and lower postoperative pain scores (MD − 0.33 on VAS; 95%CI: −0.59 to − 0.08). Ischemia time was longer with SP RAPN (MD 6.06 min; 95%CI: 0.98 to 11.14). Operative time, postoperative eGFR, oncologic outcomes, complications, and mortality were comparable between groups, with subgroup analyses showing no consistent effect modification. SP RAPN appears to provide perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes comparable to MP RAPN, with modest improvements in selected recovery parameters. Differences in ischemia time remain uncertain due to substantial heterogeneity and low certainty of evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41851385What 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.