The 100 most-cited articles in Urological Surgery: A bibliometric analysis.

BACKGROUND The purpose of this bibliometric analysis was to identify and assess the 100 most-cited articles (T100 articles) on urological surgery. METHODS The Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection database was used to investigate the T100 articles in the field of urological surgery. Different aspects of the T100 articles, including the countries, journals, authors, and topics, were analyzed. RESULTS The number of citations of T100 articles published between 1989 and 2016 ranged from 334 to 2189. The T100 articles originated from 28 countries, with more than half originating from the USA (n =80). Professor Bill-Axelson A from Uppsala University Hospital published the largest number of T100 articles as the first author (4) and as a coauthor (1). The Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from the USA is the top institution with the most T100 articles in the field of urological surgery. The special journal Journal of Urology published 41 of the T100 articles, which had a total of 19780 citations. CONCLUSIONS Our study analyzed the 100 most-cited articles in the field of urological surgery. The USA is the dominant country in terms of the number of T100 articles, scientists and institutions. Surgery related to urological cancer has garnered the most academic attention, especially prostate cancer and renal cancer.

[1]  H. G. van der Poel,et al.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. , 2012, European urology.

[2]  G. Gandaglia,et al.  Novel Technologies in Urologic Surgery: a Rapidly Changing Scenario , 2016, Current Urology Reports.

[3]  J. Kelly,et al.  The 100 most cited publications in cardiac surgery: a bibliometric analysis , 2015, Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971 -).

[4]  M. Carini,et al.  Tumour contact surface area as a predictor of postoperative complications and renal function in patients undergoing partial nephrectomy for renal tumours , 2018, BJU international.

[5]  Ashutosh Tewari,et al.  Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. , 2002, The Journal of urology.

[6]  W. Lewis,et al.  The 100 most influential manuscripts in gastric cancer: A bibliometric analysis. , 2016, International journal of surgery.

[7]  F. Debruyne.  Legends in urology. , 2015, The Canadian journal of urology.

[8]  Yuehua Wan,et al.  Alzheimer’s disease research in the future: bibliometric analysis of cholinesterase inhibitors from 1993 to 2012 , 2013, Scientometrics.

[9]  Rebecca L. Siegel Mph,et al.  Cancer statistics, 2018 , 2018 .

[10]  H. G. van der Poel,et al.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. , 2012, European urology.

[11]  V. Pansadoro,et al.  Retrosigmoid Versus Traditional Ileal Conduit for Urinary Diversion After Radical Cystectomy. , 2019, European urology.

[12]  C. Chevreau,et al.  [Laparoscopic nephrectomy]. , 1991, Progres en urologie : journal de l'Association francaise d'urologie et de la Societe francaise d'urologie.

[13]  J. Masood,et al.  Is it the End for Urologic Pelvic Laparoscopic Surgery? , 2017, Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques.

[14]  Sercan Ozcan,et al.  The Management of Nanotechnology: Analysis of Technology Linkages and the Regional Nanotechnology Competencies , 2017 .

[15]  B. Bernstein,et al.  Urological technology: where will we be in 20 years’ time? , 2018, Therapeutic advances in urology.

[16]  L R Kavoussi,et al.  Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. , 1997, Urology.

[17]  M. Rodwin.  Reforming Pharmaceutical Industry-Physician Financial Relationships: Lessons from the United States, France, and Japan , 2011, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics.

[18]  Lingfeng Chen,et al.  Soft Robotics: Academic Insights and Perspectives Through Bibliometric Analysis , 2018, Soft robotics.

[19]  M. Menon,et al.  Nerve‐sparing robot‐assisted radical cystoprostatectomy and urinary diversion , 2003, BJU international.

[20]  Dae Young Yoon,et al.  The 100 most-cited articles in neuroimaging: A bibliometric analysis , 2016, NeuroImage.

[21]  M. Menon,et al.  Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. , 2009, European urology.

[22]  P. Walsh.  Anatomic radical prostatectomy: evolution of the surgical technique. , 1998, The Journal of urology.

[23]  Mahesh Desai,et al.  The Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society Percutaneous Nephrolithotomy Global Study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 5803 patients. , 2011, Journal of endourology.

[24]  Hans Garmo,et al.  Radical Prostatectomy versus Watchful Waiting in Early Prostate Cancer , 2011 .

[25]  T. Connelly,et al.  The 100 most influential manuscripts in robotic surgery: a bibliometric analysis , 2020, Journal of robotic surgery.

[26]  Steven J. M. Jones,et al.  The Molecular Taxonomy of Primary Prostate Cancer , 2015, Cell.

[27]  E. Beutler,et al.  More on the association of glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency with hairy-cell leukemia. , 1991, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  Lorenzo Marconi,et al.  European Association of Urology Guidelines on Renal Cell Carcinoma: The 2019 Update. , 2019, European urology.

[29]  James O Peabody,et al.  Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: contemporary technique and analysis of results. , 2007, European urology.

[30]  L. Holmberg,et al.  Radical Prostatectomy or Watchful Waiting in Prostate Cancer — 29‐Year Follow‐up , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.