ArticleBMC urology2022
External validation of Pentafecta in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical cystectomy: results from a high-volume center.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors and oncological outcomes of achieving Pentafecta in radical cystectomy: a meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Pooled it
- Comparative outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical cystectomy using IPTW-adjusted trifecta and pentafecta metrics.Exploration of targeted anti-tumor therapy · 2026Article
- The current role of pentafecta in the reporting of radical cystectomy outcomes: a scoping review.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo investigate whether Pentafecta is suitable for bladder cancer patients receiving laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC).
methodsFrom November 2013 to December 2020, muscle invasive Bladder Cancer (MIBC) and non-muscle invasive Bladder Cancer (NMIBC) patients who received LRC and urinary diversion were retrospectively analyzed. Pentafecta was defined as meeting five criteria: negative soft margin, ≥ 16 lymph nodes (LNs) removed, major complications free, urinary diversion related sequelae free and clinical recurrence free within 1 year. Analyze the achievement of five criteria and compare the overall survival (OS) of Pentafecta group with non-attainment group. Multivariable Cox's regression was performed to evaluate the impact of Pentafecta on OS. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to explore the effect of surgical experience on Pentafecta attainment.
resultsA total of 340 patients were included, negative soft margin, ≥ 16 lymph nodes (LNs) removed, major complications free, urinary diversion related sequelae free and clinical recurrence free within 1 year were observed in 95.3%, 30.3%, 83.8%, 75.0% and 85.6% of patients, respectively. Pentafecta group had a significantly longer OS than the non-attainment group (P = 0.027). The group with 10-15 LNs removed and meeting the other four criteria had a similar OS to group with ≥ 16 LNs removed (Pentafecta group) (5-year OS: 67.3% vs 72.7%, P = 0.861). Pentafecta (HR = 0.33, P = 0.011), positive lymph nodes (HR = 2.08, P = 0.028) and MIBC (HR = 3.70, P < 0.001) were all significant predictors of OS in multivariable Cox's regression. Surgical experience (OR = 1.05, P < 0.001), conduit (OR = 2.09, P = 0.047) and neobladder (OR = 2.47, P = 0.048) were all independent predictors of Pentafecta attainment in multivariable logistic regression.
conclusionsPentafecta is suitable for bladder cancer patients receiving LRC and has the potential to be a valuable tool for evaluating the quality of LRC. Based on Pentafecta analysis, removing 10 LNs instead of 16 LNs as the one of the five criteria may be more appropriate for bladder cancer patients.
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.