Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35236338›Full record

ArticleBMC urology2022

Salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy following focal ablation with irreversible electroporation: feasibility, oncological and functional outcomes.

Alexandar Blazevski, William Gondoputro, Matthijs J Scheltema, Amer Amin, Bart Geboers, Daniela Barreto, Anne-Maree Haynes, Ron Shnier, Warick Delprado, Shikha Agrawal and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
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 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Irreversible electroporation as a focal therapy for localized prostate cancer: A systematic review.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
    Review
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

12 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alexandar BlazevskiSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia. a.blazevski@garvan.org.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7063-5509
William GondoputroSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Matthijs J ScheltemaSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9098-9574
Amer AminSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0375-9245
Bart GeboersSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Daniela BarretoGarvan Institute of Medical Research and Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Anne-Maree HaynesGarvan Institute of Medical Research and Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
Ron ShnierI-MED Radiology, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Warick DelpradoDouglas Hanly Moir Pathology, Macquarie Park, NSW, Australia.
Shikha AgrawalGarvan Institute of Medical Research and Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.
James E ThompsonSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5115-9930
Phillip D StrickerSt. Vincent's Prostate Cancer Research Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0934-0656
Garvan Institute of Medical Research · AUDouglass Hanly Moir Pathology · AUNew South Wales Department of Health · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo report the feasibility, oncological and functional outcomes of salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (sRARP) for recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) after irreversible electroporation (IRE).

methodsThis was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent sRARP by a single high-volume surgeon after IRE treatment in our institution. Surgical complications, oncological and functional outcomes were assessed.

results15 patients with at least 12 months follow up were identified out of the 234 men who underwent primary IRE between 2013 and 2019. The median [IQR] age was 68 (62-70) years. The median [IQR] time from focal IRE to sRARP was 42 (21-57) months. There were no rectal, bladder or ureteric injuries. The T-stage was pT2 in 9 (60%) patients and pT3a in 6 (40%) patients. Only one (7%) patient had a positive surgical margin. At a median [IQR] follow up of 22 (16-32) months no patient had a biochemical recurrence (PSA > 0.2). All 15 patients were continent (pad-free) by 6 months and 9 (60%) patients had erections sufficient for intercourse with or without PDE5 inhibitors. No predisposing factors were identified for predicting erectile dysfunction after sRARP.

conclusionsIn patients with recurrent or residual significant PCa after focal IRE ablation it is feasible to obtain good functional and oncological outcomes with sRARP. Our results demonstrate that good outcomes can be achieved with sRARP, when respecting close monitoring post-IRE, good patient selection and surgical experience. The limitations of this study are that it is a small series, with short follow up and a lack of standardised quality of life instruments.

Indexed as

ElectroporationAgedFeasibility StudiesFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRetrospective StudiesRobotic Surgical ProceduresSalvage TherapyFocal therapyIREIrreversible electroporationProstate cancerSalvage prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID35236338
PMCPMC8892750
OpenAlexW4220721223

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.