Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35130897›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2022

Comparison of urinary and sexual patient-reported outcomes between open radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score matched, population-based study in Victoria.

Michael Rechtman, Andrew Forbes, Jeremy L Millar, Melanie Evans, Lachlan Dodds, Declan G Murphy, Sue M Evans

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC urology, 2022. 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
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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. Advances in Techniques in Radical Prostatectomy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Michael RechtmanSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 533 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Andrew ForbesSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 533 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Jeremy L MillarSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 533 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Melanie EvansSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 533 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia.
Lachlan DoddsDepartment of Urology, Ballarat Health Services, Ballarat, Australia.
Declan G MurphyEpworth Prostate Centre, Epworth Healthcare, Richmond, VIC, Australia.
Sue M EvansSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, 533 St Kilda Road, Melbourne, VIC, 3004, Australia. sue.evans@cancervic.org.au.
Monash University · AUSt John of God Hospital · AUUniversity of Melbourne · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRobot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) rates have been increasing worldwide despite a lack of evidence of superior patient-reported outcomes (PROs) compared to open radical prostatectomy (ORP).

methodsThis retrospective study included men who contributed data to the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Registry-Victoria (PCOR-Vic), underwent ORP or RARP between January 2014 and May 2018, and completed the EPIC-26 questionnaire 12 months post-surgery. Urinary and sexual bother items, the urinary incontinence domain score, the urinary irritative/obstructive domain score, the sexual domain score and the pad usage item from the EPIC-26 questionnaire were compared between the two cohorts. Unmatched and propensity score matched cohorts were used to determine if there were differences in urinary and sexual PROs between ORP and RARP after accounting for the patient case-mix and surgeon characteristics.

resultsOf 3826 patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP), 1047 received ORP and 2779 received RARP. Propensity score matching reduced the magnitude of the observed differences in four out of six outcomes (urinary bother, urinary incontinence domain, pad usage and sexual domain). Using a propensity score matched cohort, there were no statistically significant differences for RARP patients, compared to ORP patients, in terms of urinary bother (Rd = 0.47%, P = 0.707), urinary incontinence domain scores (Coeff = - 0.84, P = 0.506), urinary irritative/obstructive domain scores (Coeff = 1.03, P = 0.105), pad usage (Rd = - 0.75%, P = 0.771) and sexual bother (Rd = - 0.89%, P = 0.731). RARP patients had slightly higher sexual domain scores (Coeff = 3.65, P = 0.005).

conclusionThere were no differences in urinary PROs between ORP and RARP when assessed 12 months post-surgery. The sexual domain slightly favoured RARP, however this was not deemed clinically significant.

Indexed as

Patient Reported Outcome MeasuresAgedErectile DysfunctionHumansMaleMiddle AgedPostoperative ComplicationsPropensity ScoreProstatectomyRegistriesRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresUrinary IncontinenceVictoriaExpanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) questionnaireOpen radical prostatectomy (ORP)Patient-reported outcomes (PRO)Radical prostatectomy (RP)Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP)

Identifiers

PMID35130897
PMCPMC8822814
OpenAlexW4210624097

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.