ReviewDer Urologe. Ausg. A2012
[Treatment of bladder cancer. Value of radical prostate-sparing cystectomy].
Review in Der Urologe. Ausg. A, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Usefulness of transurethral biopsy for staging the prostatic urethra before radical cystectomy.The Journal of urology · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the management of muscle-invasive bladder cancer, prostate-sparing cystectomy represents a surgical alternative to radical cystoprostatectomy with equivalent oncological and improved functional results. Patient selection for prostate-sparing cystectomy is very critical and men with pT1 high-grade or solitary pT2 urothelial cancer without multifocal CIS and bladder neck involvement appear to be the most appropriate candidates. Stromal invasion of the prostate and accompanying clinically significant prostate cancer must be ruled out by appropriate diagnostic maneuvers. Considering the above-mentioned selection criteria, local and systemic relapse rates are around 3 and 13%, respectively, and do not differ from radical cystoprostatectomy. Daytime and nighttime continence is around 90-95% and erectile function can be preserved in 80-90% of the patients. Therefore, the functional results are much better than those achieved for nerve-sparing radical cystoprostatectomy. Especially young men might benefit from prostate-sparing cystectomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.