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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European urology 2014-06, Vol.65 (6), p.1154-1161
Hauptverfasser: 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
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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=28441816$$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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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 &lt; 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