Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31616979›Full record

Trial reportWorld journal of urology2020

Advanced Reconstruction of Vesicourethral Support (ARVUS) during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: first independent evaluation and review of other factors influencing 1 year continence outcomes.

Viktor Kováčik, Matúš Maciak, Vladimír Baláž, Jozef Babeľa, Viliam Kubas, Peter Bujdák, Peter Beňo

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in World journal of urology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Viktor Kováčik2nd Urology department of Slovak Medical University, F.D. Roosevelt hospital, Banská Bystrica, Slovakia. viktor.kovacik@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5575-3016
Matúš MaciakDepartment of Probability and Mathematical Statistics, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.
Vladimír Baláž2nd Urology department of Slovak Medical University, F.D. Roosevelt hospital, Banská Bystrica, Slovakia.
Jozef Babeľa2nd Urology department of Slovak Medical University, F.D. Roosevelt hospital, Banská Bystrica, Slovakia.
Viliam Kubas2nd Urology department of Slovak Medical University, F.D. Roosevelt hospital, Banská Bystrica, Slovakia.
Peter BujdákFaculty of Medicine, Slovak Medical University, Bratislava, Slovakia.
Peter BeňoDepartment of Vascular Surgery, Central Military and Faculty Hospital, Ružomberok, Slovakia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeAnterior and posterior reconstructions of pelvic structures are used during a robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to obtain better continence outcomes. This study was conducted to evaluate the Advanced Reconstruction of Vesicourethral Support (ARVUS), a novel postprostatectomy reconstruction technique.

methodsThe study was designed as a prospective, controlled, partially randomized and blinded experiment. The statistical analysis was based on the generalized linear modeling (GLM) framework with random effects: the logit link was used to model the probability of achieving continence and the logarithmic link was used to evaluate the overall score of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF). The significance of the fixed effects and all possible two-way interactions was tested using the critical level of 0.05.

resultsThe probability of achieving the continence significantly depends on the neurovascular bundle sparing (p < 0.001) and the time after the surgery (p < 0.001). Analogously, the expected ICIQ-SF score significantly depends on the nerve-sparing status (p = 0.035) and the time after the surgery (p < 0.001). No statistically significant difference between the unilateral or bilateral nerve sparing was found. The ARVUS technique seems to perform slightly worse with respect to the expected continence, but this difference is within the margins of random fluctuations (p = 0.715).

conclusionsThe study demonstrates a significant positive association between the nerve-sparing approach and the patient's continence, however, regardless of the unilateral or bilateral approach. In terms of the continence rate, no statistically significant benefits of ARVUS were observed.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresAgedAnastomosis, SurgicalHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsProspective StudiesProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUrethraUrinary BladderUrinary IncontinenceUrologic Surgical ProceduresARVUSContinenceNerve sparingRadical prostatectomy

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.