Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32537666›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of urology2021

Oncological and functional outcomes in patients over 70 years of age treated with robotic radical prostatectomy: a propensity-matched analysis.

Pratik M S Gurung, Bokai Wang, Stephen Hassig, Jasmine Wood, Elizabeth Ellis, Changyong Feng, Ahmed E Ghazi, Jean V Joseph

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. State of the science of sexual health among older cancer survivors: an integrative review.Journal of cancer survivorship : research and practice · 2025
    Review
  6. Integrating plasma exosomal miRNAs, ultrasound radiomics and tPSA for the diagnosis and prediction of early prostate cancer: a multi-center study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. 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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pratik M S GurungDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA. pratik_gurung@urmc.rochester.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1537-9917
Bokai WangDepartment of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
Stephen HassigDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
Jasmine WoodDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
Elizabeth EllisDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
Changyong FengDepartment of Biostatistics and Computational Biology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
Ahmed E GhaziDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
Jean V JosephDepartment of Urology, University of Rochester Medical Center, New York, USA.
University of Rochester Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of this study was to report on the safety (complications) and efficacy (oncological and functional outcomes) of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), performed at our institution, in patients aged over 70. PATIENTS AND

methodsReview of our prospectively collected database [Cancer Information Systems (CAISIS)] identified two hundred and fifteen (215) patients, aged > 70, who underwent RARP for localized prostate cancer between July 2003 and August 2017. A propensity score-matched analysis, with multiple covariates, was performed to stratify the patients into Age ≤ 70 and Age > 70 comparison groups.

resultsApart from Age (mean ± SD years: 73.5 ± 2.1 vs 59.5 ± 5.9, p < 0.0001) and nerve-sparing status, the two groups were evenly matched for all covariates (p values > 0.05). Median follow-up was 10.6 years. There were no 90-day mortalities in either group. Minor complications (Clavien ≤ 2) were more common in the Age > 70 group (p = 0.0002). Operating room time (p = 0.83), length of hospital stay (p = 0.06) and catheterization duration (p = 0.13) were similar. On final pathology, a higher pT stage (p < 0.0001) and pN1 (p = 0.003) were observed in the Age > 70 group. However, this did not translate adversely into higher rates of positive surgical margin (p = 0.41) or biochemical relapse (p = 0.72). Allowing for the follow-up duration (median 10.6 years), cancer-specific survival was marginally significant (p = 0.05) with an observed lower rate in the Age > 70 group. In terms of functional outcomes, post-operative erectile dysfunction and pad-free continence were significantly better in the younger cohort (p < 0.0001).

conclusionsRobot-assisted radical prostatectomy should not be denied to those over 70 years solely on the basis of age. Older men need to be counseled about the likelihood of encountering higher-risk features on final pathology and that their functional outcomes may be worse compared to a younger person.

Indexed as

Robotic Surgical ProceduresAgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedPropensity ScoreProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRecovery of FunctionRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeElderlyOutcomesProstate cancerRadical prostatectomyRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID32537666
OpenAlexW3035329650

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.