Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35819591›Full record

ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2023

Development and clinical applicability of MRI-based 3D prostate models in the planning of nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Hans Veerman, Thierry N Boellaard, Jari A van der Eijk, Judith H Sluijter, Ton A Roeleveld, Tim M van der Sluis, Jakko A Nieuwenhuijzen, Esther Wit, Maarten J A van Alphen, Robert L P van Veen and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

13 authors.

Hans VeermanDepartment of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. h.veerman@nki.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2297-8179
Thierry N BoellaardDepartment of Radiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jari A van der EijkDepartment of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Judith H SluijterDepartment of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Ton A RoeleveldProstate Cancer Network the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Tim M van der SluisDepartment of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Boelelaan, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Jakko A NieuwenhuijzenDepartment of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Boelelaan, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Esther WitDepartment of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Maarten J A van AlphenVerwelius 3D Lab, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Robert L P van VeenVerwelius 3D Lab, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni Van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
André N VisDepartment of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, Location Boelelaan, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Henk G van der PoelDepartment of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Pim J van LeeuwenDepartment of Urology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066CX, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The interpretation of conventional MRI may be limited by the two-dimensional presentation of the images. To develop patient-specific MRI prostate-based virtual and three-dimensional (3D)-printed models. To assess the association between 3D imaging and the pathological outcome of RARP specimen. To assess the clinical applicability of 3D models to guide nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). We created virtual 3D and 3D-printed 3D models of 20 prostate cancer patients retrospectively. A comparison was made between conventional MRI and 3D-reconstructed images. The concordance between tumour lesion location in 3D models and pathology reporting of RARP specimens was assessed. Seven urologists assessed the side-specific extent of nerve-sparing based on (1) conventional MR images, (2) virtual 3D models, and (3) 3D-printed models. Clinically relevant changes in nerve-sparing and the absolute agreement between observers was analyzed using the Chi-square test and intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). The index lesion was correctly visualized in 19/20 (95%) 3D models and the expected location of extraprostatic extension was correctly visualized in all 3D models. Clinically relevant changes in the planned extent of nerve-sparing between MRI and virtual 3D models and MRI and 3D-printed models were found in 25% and 26%. The ICC of the planned extent of nerve-sparing between urologists was 0.40 (95% CI 0.28-0.55) for conventional MRI, 0.52 (95% CI 0.39-0.66) for virtual 3D models and 0.58 (95% CI 0.45-0.71) for 3D-printed models. 3D models of the MRI prostate to guide RARP could aid urologists in the planning of nerve-sparing surgery as shown by a higher inter-observer agreement.

Indexed as

Prostatic NeoplasmsRoboticsRobotic Surgical ProceduresHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleProstateProstatectomyRetrospective StudiesMagnetic resonance imagingNerve-sparingProstate cancerProstatectomyThree-dimensional images

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.