↓ Skip to main content

A comparison between laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic approach for partial nephrectomy in children with duplex kidney: a multicentric survey

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Urology, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
31 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
20 Mendeley
Title
A comparison between laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic approach for partial nephrectomy in children with duplex kidney: a multicentric survey
Published in
World Journal of Urology, November 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00345-015-1728-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ciro Esposito, Maria Escolino, Go Miyano, Paolo Caione, Fabio Chiarenza, Giovanna Riccipetitoni, Atsuyuki Yamataka, Antonio Savanelli, Alessandro Settimi, Francois Varlet, Dariusz Patkowski, Mariapina Cerulo, Marco Castagnetti, Holger Till, Rosaria Marotta, Angela La Manna, Jean-Stephane Valla

Abstract

To compare the outcome of laparoscopic and retroperitoneoscopic approach for partial nephrectomy in infants and children with duplex kidneys. Data of 102 patients underwent partial nephrectomy in a 5-year period using MIS procedures were analyzed. Fifty-two children underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN), and 50 children underwent retroperitoneoscopic partial nephrectomy (RPN). Median age at surgery was 4.2 years. Statistical analysis was performed using χ (2) test and Student's t test. The overall complications rate was significantly higher after RPN (15/50, 30 %) than after LPN (10/52, 19 %) [χ (2) = 0.05]. In LPN group, complications [4 urinomas, 2 symptomatic refluxing distal ureteral stumps (RDUS) and 4 urinary leakages] were conservatively managed. In RPN group, complications (6 urinomas, 8 RDUS, 1 opening of remaining calyxes) required a re-operation in 2 patients. In both groups no conversion to open surgery was reported. Operative time (LPN:166.2 min vs RPN: 255 min; p < 0.001) and hospitalization (LPN: 3.5 days vs RPN: 4.1 days; p < 0.001) were significantly shorter in LPN group. No postoperative loss of renal function was reported in both groups. Our results demonstrate that RPN remains a technically demanding procedure with a significantly higher complications and re-operation rate compared to LPN. In addition, length of surgery and hospitalization were significantly shorter after LPN compared to RPN. LPN seems to be a faster, safer and technically easier procedure to perform in children compared to RPN due to a larger operative space and the possibility to perform a complete ureterectomy in refluxing systems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 20 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 20 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 5 25%
Researcher 3 15%
Professor 2 10%
Lecturer 1 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 5%
Other 4 20%
Unknown 4 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 5%
Unknown 5 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2017.
All research outputs
#20,413,129
of 22,963,381 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Urology
#1,927
of 2,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#324,506
of 387,199 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Urology
#29
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,963,381 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 387,199 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.