Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35083069›Full record

ArticleCentral European journal of urology2021

Influence of operative time and blood loss on surgical margins and functional outcomes for laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective analysis.

Stefano Salciccia, Davide Rosati, Pietro Viscuso, Vittorio Canale, Emiliano Scarrone, Marco Frisenda, Roberta Catuzzi, Martina Moriconi, Vincenzo Asero, Stefano Signore and 18 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Central European journal of urology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

28 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Stefano SalcicciaDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Davide RosatiDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Pietro ViscusoDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Vittorio CanaleDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Emiliano ScarroneDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Marco FrisendaDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Roberta CatuzziDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Martina MoriconiDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Vincenzo AseroDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Stefano SignoreDepartment of Urology, S. Eugenio Hospital, ASL Rome 2, Rome, Italy.
Mauro De DominicisDepartment of Urology, Cristo Re Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Paolo EmiliozziDepartment of Urology, San Camillo Forlanini Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Antonio CarboneDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza Rome University, Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy.
Antonio Luigi PastoreDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza Rome University, Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy.
Andrea FuschiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences and Biotechnologies, Sapienza Rome University, Polo Pontino, Latina, Italy.
Giovanni Battista Di PierroDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Alessandro GentilucciDepartment of Urology, University Sapienza Rome, Rome, Italy.
Susanna CattarinoDepartment of Urology, University Sapienza Rome, Rome, Italy.
Gianna MariottiDepartment of Urology, University Sapienza Rome, Rome, Italy.
Gian Maria BusettoDepartment of Urology and Renal Transplantation, University of Foggia, Policlinico Riuniti, Foggia, Italy.
Matteo FerroDepartment of Urology, European Institute of Oncology (IEO) IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Ettore De BerardinisDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Gian Piero RicciutiDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Valeria PanebiancoDepartment of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Fabio Massimo MaglioccaDepartment of Radiological, Oncological and Anatomopathological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Francesco Del GiudiceDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Martina MaggiDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Alessandro SciarraDepartment of Maternal-Infant and Urological Sciences, Sapienza Rome University, Policlinico Umberto I, Rome, Italy.
Policlinico Umberto I · ITSapienza University of Rome · ITCarlo Forlanini Hospital · ITEuropean Institute of Oncology · ITOspedale Cristo Re · ITUniversity of Foggia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe aim of this article was to analyze whether operative time and blood loss during radical prostatectomy (RP) can significantly influence surgical margins (SM) status and post-operative functional outcomes. MATERIAL AND

methodsWe prospectively analyzed prostate cancer (PC) patients undergoing RP, using robot-assisted (RARP) or laparoscopic (LRP) procedures. Blood loss was defined using the variation in hemoglobin (Hb, g/dl) values from the day before surgery and no later than 4 hours after surgery.

resultsFrom a whole population of 413 cases considered for RP, 67% underwent LRP and 33.0% RARP. Positive SM (SM+) were found in 33.9% of cases. Mean surgical operative time was 172.3 ±76 min (range 49-485), whereas blood loss was 2.3 ±1.2 g/dl (range 0.3-7.6). Operative time and blood loss at RP were not significantly correlated (r = -0.028275; p = 0.684). SM+ rates significantly (p = 0.002) varied by operative time; a higher SM+ rate was found in cases with an operative time <120 min (41.2%) and >240 min (53.4%). The risk of SM+ significantly increased 1.70 and 1.94 times in cases with an operative time <120 min and >240 min, respectively, independently to the surgical approach. The rate of erectile disfunction (ED) varied from 22.4% to 60.3% between <120 min and >240 min procedures (p = 0.001). According to blood loss, SM+ rates slightly but significantly (p = 0.032) varied; a higher rate of SM+ was found in cases with a Hb variation between 2-4 g/dl (35.9%).

conclusionsIndependently to the surgical approach, operative time, more than blood loss at RP, represents a significant variable able to influence SM status and post-operative ED.

Indexed as

blood losslaparoscopic prostatectomyoperative timeprostatic neoplasmrobot-assisted prostatectomysurgical margins

Identifiers

PMID35083069
PMCPMC8771133
OpenAlexW4205185571

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.