ArticleProstate international2022
Initial experience of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A single surgeon's experience with technique description.
Article in Prostate international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of transperitoneal anterior, retzius-sparing, extraperitoneal, transvesical and perineal approaches on urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases · 2025Pooled it
- The current landscape of single-port robotic surgery in urology.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Does experience translate? A multicenter evaluation of the learning curve in single-port robotic prostatectomy based on prior multiport proficiency.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Extraperitoneal single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Short-term outcomes and technique description.Investigative and clinical urology · 2024Article
- Navigating Now and Next: Recent Advances and Future Horizons in Robotic Radical Prostatectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Single-port and multiport robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis.Prostate international · 2023Review
- Learning curves and perioperative outcomes of single-incision robotic sacrocolpopexy on two different da VinciJournal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Irreversible electroporation for prostate cancer using PSMA PET-CT.Prostate international · 2023Article
- Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: learning curves and outcomes from an Australian perspective.Prostate international · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: With the implementation of da Vinci SP robot platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA), we described our initial experience with the da Vinci SP robot platform (Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) for single-port robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP). Methods: This retrospective review included 30 consecutive patients with prostate biopsy-confirmed prostate cancer who underwent SP-RARP by a single surgeon between June and November 2020. SP-RARP was performed with a single-incision plus one method, in which the multichannel guide port was inserted directly with an additional assist port. We report our initial experience of perioperative and early functional outcomes. Results: The mean operative time (SD), console time (SD), and blood loss were 142.8 (15.1) min, 109.9 (15.7) min, and 133.0 (72.9) mL, respectively. No intraoperative complications or blood transfusions were reported. Of the 30 patients, 21 (70.0%), 7 (23.3%) and 2 (6.7%) had stage pT2, pT3a and pT3b disease, respectively. Positive surgical margins were reported in 5 of the 30 (16.7%) patients in the final pathology report, including 2 of 21 (9.5%) with stage pT2 and 3 of 9 (33.3%) with ≥ pT3. At 12 weeks after SP-RARP, 80.0% of patients had achieved continence and the potency was 46.7%; 8 of 11 (72.7%) had sexual health inventory for men (SHIM) scores ≥ 17 and 6 of 19 (31.6%) had SHIM scores < 17. Conclusions: The SP platform for radical prostatectomy was technically safe and feasible. After overcoming the technical learning curve, this platform may provide high-quality outcomes comparable to those of multi-port platforms.
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.