SynthesisScientific reports2017
Comparison of intrafascial and non-intrafascial radical prostatectomy for low risk localized prostate cancer.
Synthesis in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a Risk Model to Identify and Prevent Factors Influencing Erectile Dysfunction After Robotic Radical Prostatectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Different Nerve-Sparing Techniques during Radical Prostatectomy and Their Impact on Functional Outcomes.Cancers · 2022Review
- Comparison between a novel knotless technique and the conventional single knot technique of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by novice laparoscopists.The Journal of international medical research · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this meta-analysis study, we compared the oncological and functional outcomes of intrafascial radical prostatectomy (IFRP) with non-intrafascial radical prostatectomy (NIFRP) in the treatment of patients with low risk localized prostate cancer (PCa). Relevant articles were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Ovid, and the ISI Web of Knowledge databases. A total of 2096 patients were included from 7 eligible studies. Results of the pooled data showed that the oncological outcomes including gleason score, positive surgical margin and biochemical free survival rates were similar between the two groups. IFRP was superior to NIFRP with lower postoperative complication rates (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38, 0.85, p = 0.006), higher continence rates at 3 months post-operation (RR: 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04, 1.26; p = 0.006), and higher potency rates at 6 months (RR: 1.53; 95% CI, 1.07, 2.18; p = 0.02) and 12 months post-operation (RR: 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11, 1.73; p = 0.005). Additionally, there was a tendency towards higher potency rate in patients ≤65 years old compared with patients >65 years old after IFRP. Overall, these findings suggest that IFRP in young patients with low risk localized PCa had less postoperative complications, shortened time to return to continence and improved potency rate without compromising complete tumor control.
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.