ReviewArab journal of urology2017
Critical appraisal of literature comparing minimally invasive extraperitoneal and transperitoneal radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Arab journal of urology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Baseline factors and surgical procedures affecting changes in lower urinary tract symptoms after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: the impact of nerve-sparing.International urology and nephrology · 2024Article
- Transperitoneal Versus Extraperitoneal Approach for Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Urology research & practice · 2023Article
- Experience with an innovative surgical approach: 321 cases modified extraperitoneal single-incision robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy without dedicated PORT based on Da Vinci SI system.Journal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Transperineal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with Si da Vinci surgical system: initial experience and description of technique.Translational cancer research · 2021Article
- The effect of peritoneal re-approximation on lymphocele formation in transperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy.Turkish journal of urology · 2020Article
- Technical advancements in robotic prostatectomy: single-port extraperitoneal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and single-port transperineal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.Translational andrology and urology · 2020Article
- A brief overview of the development of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Arab journal of urology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo systematically review studies comparing extraperitoneal (E-RP) and transperitoneal minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (T-RP).
methodsThe systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines in September 2015. Several databases were searched including Medline and Scopus. Only studies comparing E-RP and T-RP (either laparoscopic or robot-assisted approach) were evaluated. The follow-up of the included patients had to be ≥6 months.
resultsIn all, 1256 records were identified after the initial database search. Of these 20 studies (2580 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The hospital stay was significantly lower in the E-RP cohort, with a mean difference of -0.30 days (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.35, -0.24) for the laparoscopic group and 1.09 days (95% CI -1.47, -0.70) for the robotic group (
conclusionThis review suggests that the extraperitoneal approach is associated with a shorter hospital stay, lower overall complication rate, and earlier return to continence when compared to the transperitoneal approach. The transperitoneal approach has a lower lymphocele rate.
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.