Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Abstract Context Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses. Objective To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. Evidence acquisition A systema...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European urology 2014-06, Vol.65 (6), p.1154-1161 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1161 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 1154 |
container_title | European urology |
container_volume | 65 |
creator | Brandao, Luis Felipe Autorino, Riccardo Laydner, Humberto Haber, Georges-Pascal Ouzaid, Idir De Sio, Marco Perdonà, Sisto Stein, Robert J Porpiglia, Francesco Kaouk, Jihad H |
description | Abstract Context Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses. Objective To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. Evidence acquisition A systematic literature review was performed in August 2013 using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic search engines. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria. Evidence synthesis Nine studies were selected for the analysis including 600 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy (277 robot assisted and 323 laparoscopic). Only one of the studies was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) but of low quality according to the Jadad scale. However, the methodological quality of included nonrandomized studies was relatively high. Body mass index was higher for the laparoscopic group (weighted mean difference [WMD]: −2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 3.01 to −1.74; p < 0.00001). A transperitoneal approach was mostly used for both techniques (72.5% of robotic cases and 75.5% of laparoscopic cases; p = 0.27). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39–1.75; p = 0.61) and operative time (WMD: 5.88; 95% CI, −6.02 to 17.79; p = 0.33). There was a significantly longer hospital stay in the conventional laparoscopic group (WMD: −0.43; 95% CI, −0.56 to −0.30; p < 0.00001), as well as a higher estimated blood loss (WMD: −18.21; 95% CI, −29.11 to −7.32; p = 0.001). There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.04; 95% CI, −0.07 to −0.00; p = 0.05) between groups. Most of the postoperative complications were minor (80% for the robotic group and 68% for the conventional laparoscopic group). Limitations of the present analysis are the limited sample size and including only one low-quality RCT. Conclusions Robot-assisted adrenalectomy can be performed safely and effectively with operative time and conversion rates similar to laparoscopic adrenalectomy. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of adrenal masses. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.021 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1532480563</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0302283813010087</els_id><sourcerecordid>1532480563</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-6f0ddaf2bfdd98046fd412c48fa07ed54987187453870665f7d334c61e02b7aa3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkl2L1DAUhoMo7uzqPxDpjbA3rScfTVMvhGFxVRhRdtXbkElOIWPbjEmr9N-bMqOCN14FwnPOyfucEPKMQkWBypeHCuc4x1AxoLyCtgJGH5ANVQ0vm1rCQ7IBDqxkiqsLcpnSAQB43fLH5IIJaNq2rjfk013Yh8nb4ivGNKdiZ44mhmTDMd9tXcTR9GinMCyvim1xv6QJB7Pyd_jD48_CjK74gJMpTQaX5NMT8qgzfcKn5_OKfLl98_nmXbn7-Pb9zXZXWiGaqZQdOGc6tu-caxUI2TlBmRWqM9Cgq0WrmhxF1Fw1IGXdNY5zYSVFYPvGGH5Frk99jzF8nzFNevDJYt-bEcOcNK05EwpqyTMqTqjNyVLETh-jH0xcNAW9utQHfXKpV5caWp1d5rLn5wnzfkD3p-i3vAy8OAMmWdN30YzWp7-cEoIqKjP3-sRh9pGtRZ2sx9Gi8zG71S74_73k3wa296PPM7_hgukQ5pjt58w6MQ36ft37unbKgQLkD_EL8Miowg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1532480563</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Brandao, Luis Felipe ; Autorino, Riccardo ; Laydner, Humberto ; Haber, Georges-Pascal ; Ouzaid, Idir ; De Sio, Marco ; Perdonà, Sisto ; Stein, Robert J ; Porpiglia, Francesco ; Kaouk, Jihad H</creator><creatorcontrib>Brandao, Luis Felipe ; Autorino, Riccardo ; Laydner, Humberto ; Haber, Georges-Pascal ; Ouzaid, Idir ; De Sio, Marco ; Perdonà, Sisto ; Stein, Robert J ; Porpiglia, Francesco ; Kaouk, Jihad H</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Context Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses. Objective To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. Evidence acquisition A systematic literature review was performed in August 2013 using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic search engines. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria. Evidence synthesis Nine studies were selected for the analysis including 600 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy (277 robot assisted and 323 laparoscopic). Only one of the studies was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) but of low quality according to the Jadad scale. However, the methodological quality of included nonrandomized studies was relatively high. Body mass index was higher for the laparoscopic group (weighted mean difference [WMD]: −2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 3.01 to −1.74; p < 0.00001). A transperitoneal approach was mostly used for both techniques (72.5% of robotic cases and 75.5% of laparoscopic cases; p = 0.27). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39–1.75; p = 0.61) and operative time (WMD: 5.88; 95% CI, −6.02 to 17.79; p = 0.33). There was a significantly longer hospital stay in the conventional laparoscopic group (WMD: −0.43; 95% CI, −0.56 to −0.30; p < 0.00001), as well as a higher estimated blood loss (WMD: −18.21; 95% CI, −29.11 to −7.32; p = 0.001). There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.04; 95% CI, −0.07 to −0.00; p = 0.05) between groups. Most of the postoperative complications were minor (80% for the robotic group and 68% for the conventional laparoscopic group). Limitations of the present analysis are the limited sample size and including only one low-quality RCT. Conclusions Robot-assisted adrenalectomy can be performed safely and effectively with operative time and conversion rates similar to laparoscopic adrenalectomy. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of adrenal masses.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0302-2838</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-7560</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.021</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24079955</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EUURAV</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Adrenalectomy ; Adrenalectomy - methods ; Biological and medical sciences ; Blood Loss, Surgical ; Comparative ; Conversion to Open Surgery ; Humans ; Laparoscopic ; Laparoscopy - adverse effects ; Laparoscopy - methods ; Length of Stay ; Medical sciences ; Meta-analysis ; Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases ; Operative Time ; Robotic ; Robotic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects ; Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods ; Urology</subject><ispartof>European urology, 2014-06, Vol.65 (6), p.1154-1161</ispartof><rights>2013</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier B.V.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-6f0ddaf2bfdd98046fd412c48fa07ed54987187453870665f7d334c61e02b7aa3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-6f0ddaf2bfdd98046fd412c48fa07ed54987187453870665f7d334c61e02b7aa3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302283813010087$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28441816$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24079955$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Brandao, Luis Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Autorino, Riccardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laydner, Humberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haber, Georges-Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ouzaid, Idir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Sio, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perdonà, Sisto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Robert J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Porpiglia, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaouk, Jihad H</creatorcontrib><title>Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><title>European urology</title><addtitle>Eur Urol</addtitle><description>Abstract Context Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses. Objective To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. Evidence acquisition A systematic literature review was performed in August 2013 using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic search engines. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria. Evidence synthesis Nine studies were selected for the analysis including 600 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy (277 robot assisted and 323 laparoscopic). Only one of the studies was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) but of low quality according to the Jadad scale. However, the methodological quality of included nonrandomized studies was relatively high. Body mass index was higher for the laparoscopic group (weighted mean difference [WMD]: −2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 3.01 to −1.74; p < 0.00001). A transperitoneal approach was mostly used for both techniques (72.5% of robotic cases and 75.5% of laparoscopic cases; p = 0.27). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39–1.75; p = 0.61) and operative time (WMD: 5.88; 95% CI, −6.02 to 17.79; p = 0.33). There was a significantly longer hospital stay in the conventional laparoscopic group (WMD: −0.43; 95% CI, −0.56 to −0.30; p < 0.00001), as well as a higher estimated blood loss (WMD: −18.21; 95% CI, −29.11 to −7.32; p = 0.001). There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.04; 95% CI, −0.07 to −0.00; p = 0.05) between groups. Most of the postoperative complications were minor (80% for the robotic group and 68% for the conventional laparoscopic group). Limitations of the present analysis are the limited sample size and including only one low-quality RCT. Conclusions Robot-assisted adrenalectomy can be performed safely and effectively with operative time and conversion rates similar to laparoscopic adrenalectomy. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of adrenal masses.</description><subject>Adrenalectomy</subject><subject>Adrenalectomy - methods</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Blood Loss, Surgical</subject><subject>Comparative</subject><subject>Conversion to Open Surgery</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopic</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - adverse effects</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</subject><subject>Operative Time</subject><subject>Robotic</subject><subject>Robotic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects</subject><subject>Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods</subject><subject>Urology</subject><issn>0302-2838</issn><issn>1873-7560</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkl2L1DAUhoMo7uzqPxDpjbA3rScfTVMvhGFxVRhRdtXbkElOIWPbjEmr9N-bMqOCN14FwnPOyfucEPKMQkWBypeHCuc4x1AxoLyCtgJGH5ANVQ0vm1rCQ7IBDqxkiqsLcpnSAQB43fLH5IIJaNq2rjfk013Yh8nb4ivGNKdiZ44mhmTDMd9tXcTR9GinMCyvim1xv6QJB7Pyd_jD48_CjK74gJMpTQaX5NMT8qgzfcKn5_OKfLl98_nmXbn7-Pb9zXZXWiGaqZQdOGc6tu-caxUI2TlBmRWqM9Cgq0WrmhxF1Fw1IGXdNY5zYSVFYPvGGH5Frk99jzF8nzFNevDJYt-bEcOcNK05EwpqyTMqTqjNyVLETh-jH0xcNAW9utQHfXKpV5caWp1d5rLn5wnzfkD3p-i3vAy8OAMmWdN30YzWp7-cEoIqKjP3-sRh9pGtRZ2sx9Gi8zG71S74_73k3wa296PPM7_hgukQ5pjt58w6MQ36ft37unbKgQLkD_EL8Miowg</recordid><startdate>20140601</startdate><enddate>20140601</enddate><creator>Brandao, Luis Felipe</creator><creator>Autorino, Riccardo</creator><creator>Laydner, Humberto</creator><creator>Haber, Georges-Pascal</creator><creator>Ouzaid, Idir</creator><creator>De Sio, Marco</creator><creator>Perdonà, Sisto</creator><creator>Stein, Robert J</creator><creator>Porpiglia, Francesco</creator><creator>Kaouk, Jihad H</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140601</creationdate><title>Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</title><author>Brandao, Luis Felipe ; Autorino, Riccardo ; Laydner, Humberto ; Haber, Georges-Pascal ; Ouzaid, Idir ; De Sio, Marco ; Perdonà, Sisto ; Stein, Robert J ; Porpiglia, Francesco ; Kaouk, Jihad H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c447t-6f0ddaf2bfdd98046fd412c48fa07ed54987187453870665f7d334c61e02b7aa3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Adrenalectomy</topic><topic>Adrenalectomy - methods</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Blood Loss, Surgical</topic><topic>Comparative</topic><topic>Conversion to Open Surgery</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopic</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - adverse effects</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases</topic><topic>Operative Time</topic><topic>Robotic</topic><topic>Robotic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects</topic><topic>Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods</topic><topic>Urology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Brandao, Luis Felipe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Autorino, Riccardo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Laydner, Humberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Haber, Georges-Pascal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ouzaid, Idir</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>De Sio, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Perdonà, Sisto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stein, Robert J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Porpiglia, Francesco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kaouk, Jihad H</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European urology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Brandao, Luis Felipe</au><au>Autorino, Riccardo</au><au>Laydner, Humberto</au><au>Haber, Georges-Pascal</au><au>Ouzaid, Idir</au><au>De Sio, Marco</au><au>Perdonà, Sisto</au><au>Stein, Robert J</au><au>Porpiglia, Francesco</au><au>Kaouk, Jihad H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>European urology</jtitle><addtitle>Eur Urol</addtitle><date>2014-06-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>65</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1154</spage><epage>1161</epage><pages>1154-1161</pages><issn>0302-2838</issn><eissn>1873-7560</eissn><coden>EUURAV</coden><abstract>Abstract Context Over the last decade, robot-assisted adrenalectomy has been included in the surgical armamentarium for the management of adrenal masses. Objective To critically analyze the available evidence of studies comparing laparoscopic and robotic adrenalectomy. Evidence acquisition A systematic literature review was performed in August 2013 using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science electronic search engines. Article selection proceeded according to the search strategy based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis criteria. Evidence synthesis Nine studies were selected for the analysis including 600 patients who underwent minimally invasive adrenalectomy (277 robot assisted and 323 laparoscopic). Only one of the studies was a randomized clinical trial (RCT) but of low quality according to the Jadad scale. However, the methodological quality of included nonrandomized studies was relatively high. Body mass index was higher for the laparoscopic group (weighted mean difference [WMD]: −2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], − 3.01 to −1.74; p < 0.00001). A transperitoneal approach was mostly used for both techniques (72.5% of robotic cases and 75.5% of laparoscopic cases; p = 0.27). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of conversion rate (odds ratio [OR]: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.39–1.75; p = 0.61) and operative time (WMD: 5.88; 95% CI, −6.02 to 17.79; p = 0.33). There was a significantly longer hospital stay in the conventional laparoscopic group (WMD: −0.43; 95% CI, −0.56 to −0.30; p < 0.00001), as well as a higher estimated blood loss (WMD: −18.21; 95% CI, −29.11 to −7.32; p = 0.001). There was also no statistically significant difference in terms of postoperative complication rate (OR: 0.04; 95% CI, −0.07 to −0.00; p = 0.05) between groups. Most of the postoperative complications were minor (80% for the robotic group and 68% for the conventional laparoscopic group). Limitations of the present analysis are the limited sample size and including only one low-quality RCT. Conclusions Robot-assisted adrenalectomy can be performed safely and effectively with operative time and conversion rates similar to laparoscopic adrenalectomy. In addition, it can provide potential advantages of a shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and lower occurrence of postoperative complications. These findings seem to support the use of robotics for the minimally invasive surgical management of adrenal masses.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>24079955</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.021</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0302-2838 |
ispartof | European urology, 2014-06, Vol.65 (6), p.1154-1161 |
issn | 0302-2838 1873-7560 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1532480563 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
subjects | Adrenalectomy Adrenalectomy - methods Biological and medical sciences Blood Loss, Surgical Comparative Conversion to Open Surgery Humans Laparoscopic Laparoscopy - adverse effects Laparoscopy - methods Length of Stay Medical sciences Meta-analysis Nephrology. Urinary tract diseases Operative Time Robotic Robotic Surgical Procedures - adverse effects Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods Urology |
title | Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Adrenalectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T15%3A40%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Robotic%20Versus%20Laparoscopic%20Adrenalectomy:%20A%20Systematic%20Review%20and%20Meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=European%20urology&rft.au=Brandao,%20Luis%20Felipe&rft.date=2014-06-01&rft.volume=65&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1154&rft.epage=1161&rft.pages=1154-1161&rft.issn=0302-2838&rft.eissn=1873-7560&rft.coden=EUURAV&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.09.021&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1532480563%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1532480563&rft_id=info:pmid/24079955&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S0302283813010087&rfr_iscdi=true |