ArticleCurrent urology2017
Quality of Life Following Prostatectomy as a Function of Surgery Type and Degree of Nerve Sparing.
Article in Current urology, 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Structured and supervised pelvic floor muscle training following confirmed contraction in post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025Review
- Health-related quality of life in long-term prostate cancer survivors after nerve-sparing and non-nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy-Results from the multiregional PROCAS study.Cancer medicine · 2020Article
- Predicting trajectories of recovery in prostate cancer patients undergone Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP).PloS one · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy with conventional retropubic radical prostatectomy in maintaining pre-surgery levels of urinary and sexual functioning and to evaluate the efficacy of nerve sparing in prostatectomies in protecting urinary functioning. MATERIAL AND
methodsPatients (n = 385) receiving both surgical procedures were surveyed prior to surgery. Multiple measures, including the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite, the Sexual Health Inventory for Men, and the International Prostate Symptom Score, assessed sexual and urinary function at an average of 12 months post-surgery.
resultsAcross multiple measures, while controlling for pre-surgical sexual functioning, robotic-assisted surgery did not offer an advantage in maintaining sexual or urinary function an average of a year following the prostatectomy. Bilateral nerve sparing offered a strong and reliable advantage in the maintenance of sexual function, but not so regarding urinary function.
conclusionWhile robotic-assisted prostatectomies may offer a number of medical advantages over open procedures, we found no significant effect on important quality of life outcomes associated with the technique.
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.