ArticleTurkish journal of urology2019
Comparison of surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes of robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer.
Article in Turkish journal of urology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes Between da Vinci XI and da Vinci SI/SP Robotic Radical Prostatectomies: A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes.World journal of urology · 2021Pooled it
- Effectiveness of pelvic floor rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy and continence recovery in relation to surgical technique.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Erectile function after laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Asian journal of urology · 2025Review
- Robot-assisted radical resection in prostate cancer comparative assessment with conventional laparoscopic prostatectomy: a retrospective comparative cohort study with single-center experience.Translational andrology and urology · 2022Article
- Application of Da Vinci Robot and Thoracoscopy in Radical Lung Cancer Surgery.Journal of healthcare engineering · 2022Article
- Efficacy and safety of single port robotic radical prostatectomy and multiport robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational andrology and urology · 2021Article
- A comparison of the da Vinci Xi vs. da Vinci Si surgical systems for radical prostatectomy.BMC surgery · 2021Article
- The association of a risk group with positive margin in the intraoperative and final pathology examination after robotic radical prostatectomy.Central European journal of urology · 2021Article
- A novel "three-port" trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.World journal of surgical oncology · 2020Article
- The role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in high-risk organ-confined prostate cancer.Urology annalsReview
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the oncological and functional outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). MATERIAL AND
methodsWe compared patients who underwent the RARP (n=778) and LRP (n=48) techniques for prostate cancer between January 2008 and July 2017 in our clinic. Patient demographics, preoperative and postoperative data, pathologic evaluation, continence, and potency rates were collected and analyzed retrospectively.
resultsThe preoperative and demographic data of the patients we included in our study were similar. The mean operation time estimated blood loss, length of hospitalization, and catheterization time were significantly shorter in the RARP group. The statistical analysis was in favor of robotic prostatectomy in the terms of the mean length of hospitalization, catheterization time, and early (<30 days) and intermediate (31-90 days) complications. Positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence rates, and recovery of continence and erectile function, were similar in both groups.
conclusionRARP and LRP in organ-confined prostate cancer are safe and effective methods. Robotic prostatectomy has a shorter operative time, length of hospitalization, catheterization time, and lower early and late complication rates.
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.