Comments on "transperitoneal vs retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review of propensity-matched studies".

Abstract

This letter provides a review of the meta-analysis by Rong et al. comparing transperitoneal (TPPN) and retroperitoneal (RPPN) robotic partial nephrectomy. While the study offers valuable insights into perioperative outcomes, such as operating time, hospital stay, blood loss, and complications, there are several methodological concerns. These include the use of non-randomized controlled trials, which may introduce bias, the lack of long-term follow-up, and high heterogeneity across studies. The letter also addresses the evaluation of serious complications and data extraction methods. It suggests that future research should focus on randomized controlled trials, longer follow-up, and more detailed analysis of complications. Overall, while acknowledging the authors' work, this letter highlights areas for improvement to strengthen the study's conclusions for clinical practice.