ReviewTranslational andrology and urology2020
Anatomical robotic prostatectomy: technical factors to achieve superb continence and erectile function.
Review in Translational andrology and urology, 2020. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recovery of urinary continence after neoadjuvant hormonal therapy plus radical prostatectomy: A multicenter retro-prospective cohort study with propensity score matching.Asian journal of urology · 2026Article
- The Role of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in the Management of Prostate Cancer and Future Perspectives.Cancers · 2025Article
- [Prehabilitation prior to radical prostatectomy : A useful concept?]Urologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Debate continues as to the superiority of robotic versus open radical prostatectomy for the surgical treatment of localized prostate cancer. Despite this controversy, retrospective data from high volume centres has demonstrated RARP is associated with improved pentafecta outcomes with lower transfusion rates, less incontinence, lower positive surgical margins and improved potency. Advocates of robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) believe an enhanced visual field, the precision afforded by robotic technology as well as lack of bleeding, sharp dissection and delicate tissue handling lead to improved outcomes. Prostate Cancer is the second most common cancer diagnosed in men, and as the number of post-surgical patients increases, the complications of urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction not only have a significant negative impact on patients' quality of life, but have become an expanding part of clinical practice. This article outlines what are believed to be the most important strategies based on anatomical knowledge and technical expertise, that allow robotic prostatectomists to achieve superb outcomes in urinary and erectile function.
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.