ArticleOncology letters2019
Clinical and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with nerve sparing vs. non-nerve sparing for high-risk prostate cancer cases.
Article in Oncology letters, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Erectile function, urinary continence and oncologic outcomes of neurovascular bundle sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Pooled it
- Clinicopathological Significances of Positive Surgical Resection Margin after Radical Prostatectomy for Prostatic Cancers: A Meta-Analysis.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2022Pooled it
- Long-term function and oncologic outcomes following nerve spare or wide resection during radical prostatectomy.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026Article
- Impact of neurovascular bundle preservation on biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer.World journal of urology · 2024Article
- Novel nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with endopelvic fascia preservation and long-term outcomes for a single surgeon.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparing pentafecta outcomes between nerve sparing and non nerve sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a propensity score-matched study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effects of nerve-sparing procedures on surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2022Article
- Practice Patterns of Korean Urologists Regarding Positive Surgical Margins after Radical Prostatectomy: a Survey and Narrative Review.Journal of Korean medical science · 2021Article
- Impact of Nerve-Sparing Status on Positive Surgical Margin Location and Biochemical Recurrence in Patients with Prostate Cancer Post Radical Prostatectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Gene signatures predict biochemical recurrence-free survival in primary prostate cancer patients after radical therapy.Cancer medicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is one of the most widely used procedures for localized prostate cancer (PCa). In the present study, the clinical and oncological outcomes of RARP with bilateral or unilateral nerve sparing (NS) for D'Amico high-risk PCa cases were assessed. Among the 767 cases who received RARP at Fujita Health University Hospital between August 2009 and December 2016, 230 high-risk PCa cases who were observed for >6 months comprised the retrospective study cohort. Bilateral NS was performed with the bilateral neurovascular bundle in eight, unilateral in 125 and none in 97 cases. Perioperative parameters [surgery time, console time, estimated blood loss, pathological stage, positive lymph node metastases [pN (+)], and surgical margin positivity] did not exhibit significant differences between the NS and non-NS cohorts. During a median follow-up time of 25 months, the 1- and 3-year biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival rates in the NS/non-NS cohorts were 84.4/86.0 and 72.7/75.0%, respectively. There were no significant differences identified between the two groups at each time period. According to multivariate analysis, the resection margin was an important factor for time to BCR, regardless of the NS technique used. The numbers of pads used daily at 3 and 6 months after RARP between the NS/non-NS cohorts were 1.1/1.5 and 0.6/1.0, respectively (P=0.045 and P=0.009), suggesting that the NS technique resulted in significantly improved outcomes regarding urinary continence recovery. In selected high-risk PCa cases, the NS technique resulted in equivalent oncological outcomes and improved urinary continence compared with the non-NS RARP group.
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.