Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35475150›Full record

ReviewBJUI compass2022

Selection of patients for nerve sparing surgery in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

André N Vis, Roderick C N van den Bergh, Henk G van der Poel, Alexander Mottrie, Philip D Stricker, Marcus Graefen, Vipul Patel, Bernardo Rocco, Birgit Lissenberg-Witte, Pim J van Leeuwen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJUI compass, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Impact ofDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

10 authors at 8 institutions in 7 countries.

André N VisDepartment of Urology Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc Amsterdam The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3419-3368
Roderick C N van den BerghDepartment of Urology Antonius Hospital Nieuwegein The Netherlands.
Henk G van der PoelProstate Cancer Network Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8772-1120
Alexander MottrieDepartment of Urology Onze Lieve Vrouw Hospital (OLV) Aalst Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1253-1592
Philip D StrickerDepartment of Urology St. Vincent's Clinic Sydney NSW Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0934-0656
Marcus GraefenMartini-Klinik University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf Hamburg Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3609-3512
Vipul PatelGlobal Robotics Institute Florida Hospital Celebration Health Orlando Florida USA.
Bernardo RoccoDepartment of Urology University of Modena and Reggio Emilia Modena Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9135-0035
Birgit Lissenberg-WitteDepartment of Epidemiology and Data Science Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc Amsterdam The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9448-1826
Pim J van LeeuwenProstate Cancer Network Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9598-5345
Amsterdam Neuroscience · NLThe Netherlands Cancer Institute · NLAdventHealth Celebration · USOnze Lieve Vrouwziekenhuis Hospital · BESt. Antonius Ziekenhuis · NLSt Vincent's Clinic · AUUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Modena and Reggio Emilia · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Context: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become the standard surgical procedure for localized prostate-cancer (PCa). Nerve-sparing surgery (NSS) during RARP has been associated with improved erectile function and continence rates after surgery. However, it remains unclear what are the most appropriate indications for NSS. Objective: The objective of this study is to systematically review the available parameters for selection of patients for NSS. The weight of different clinical variables, multiparametric magnetic-resonance-imaging (mpMRI) findings, and the impact of multiparametric-nomograms in the decision-making process on (side-specific) NSS were assessed. Evidence acquisition: This systematic review searched relevant databases and included studies performed from January 2000 until December 2020 and recruited a total of 15 840 PCa patients. Studies were assessed that defined criteria for (side-specific) NSS and associated them with oncological safety and/or functional outcomes. Risk of bias assessment was performed. Evidence synthesis: Nineteen articles were eligible for full-text review. NSS is primarily recommended in men with adequate erectile function, and with low-risk of extracapsular extension (ECE) on the side-of NSS. Separate clinical and radiological variables have low accuracy for predicting ECE, whereas nomograms optimize the risk-stratification and decision-making process to perform or to refrain from NSS when oncological safety (organ-confined disease, PSM rates) and functional outcomes (erectile function and continence rates) were assessed. Conclusions: Consensus exists that patients who are at high risk of ECE should refrain from NSS. Several multiparametric preoperative nomograms were developed to predict ECE with increased accuracy compared with single clinical, pathological, or radiological variables, but controversy exists on risk thresholds and decision rules on a conservative versus a less-conservative surgical approach. An individual clinical judgment on the possibilities of NSS set against the risks of ECE is warranted. Patient summary: NSS is aimed at sparing the nerves responsible for erection. NSS may lead to unfavorable tumor control if the risk of capsule penetration is high. Nomograms predicting extraprostatic tumor-growth are probably most helpful.

Indexed as

erectile dysfunctionevidence synthesisnerve‐sparingprostate cancerradical prostatectomysystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35475150
PMCPMC8988739
OpenAlexW3214035711

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.