ArticleOpen medicine (Warsaw, Poland)2019
A Meta-analysis of Robot Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Versus Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy.
Article in Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Robot-assisted versus laparoscopic ileal ureteral replacement: systematic review and meta-analysis.Central European journal of urology · 2024Review
- Urinary tract infection after radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy on the prognosis of patients with prostate cancer: a population-based study.BMC cancer · 2023Article
- Research progress on surgical factors related to early urinary control after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.American journal of clinical and experimental urology · 2023Review
- Robotic Surgery in Oncology.Indian journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP in patients with prostate cancer based on risk groups.Arab journal of urology · 2020Article
- Role of laparoscopy in the era of robotic surgery in urology in developing countries.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaReview
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
objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) for the treatment of localized prostate cancer.
methodsMeta-analysis was applied using Review Manager V5.3 software and the retrieved clinical trials comparing RALP with LRP for the treatment of localized prostate cancer published from 2000 to 2018 in PubMed, Ovid, ScienceDirect, and EMBASE datasets were analyzed.
resultsThis meta-analysis included 16 articles, totaling 7952 patients, with 5170 RALP patients and 2782 LRP patients. Meta-analysis showed that RALP postoperative complications were fewer (P=0.0007), and the postoperative urinary continence rate was better at 1 year after surgery (P<0.00001). There was no statistical significance between RALP and LRP with regards to the positive incidence of surgical margin (P = 0.18).
conclusionAs an emerging technology, RALP is superior to LRP for localized prostate cancer treatment in terms of postoperative complications, and postoperative urinary continence 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.