Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36801949›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Contribution of Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to the mechanism of urinary continence as demonstrated by dynamic MRI.

Yoshifumi Kadono, Takahiro Nohara, Shohei Kawaguchi, Renato Naito, Suguru Kadomoto, Hiroaki Iwamoto, Hiroshi Yaegashi, Kazuyoshi Shigehara, Kouji Izumi, Kotaro Yoshida and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.

Yoshifumi KadonoDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan. yskadono@yahoo.co.jp.
Takahiro NoharaDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Shohei KawaguchiDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Renato NaitoDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Suguru KadomotoDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Hiroaki IwamotoDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Hiroshi YaegashiDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Kazuyoshi ShigeharaDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Kouji IzumiDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Kotaro YoshidaDepartment of Radiology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kanazawa, Japan.
Toshifumi GabataDepartment of Radiology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kanazawa, Japan.
Atsushi MizokamiDepartment of Integrative Cancer Therapy and Urology, Kanazawa University Graduate School of Medical Science, 13-1 Takara-machi, Kanazawa, Ishikawa, 920-8640, Japan.
Kanazawa University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has been reported to exhibit better postoperative urinary continence, but the reasons behind this are unknown. This study included 254 cases who underwent RARP and underwent postoperative dynamic MRI. We measured the urine loss ratio (ULR) immediately after postoperative urethral catheter removal and investigated its affecting factors and the mechanisms. Nerve-sparing (NS) techniques was performed in 175 (69%) unilateral and 34 (13%) bilateral cases, whereas Retzius-sparing in 58 (23%) cases. The median ULR early after indwelling catheter removal in all patients was 4.0%. The multivariate analysis was performed on factors that reduce ULR and found that the following factors were associated with ULR: younger age, NS and Retzius-sparing, which were significant. Additionally, dynamic MRI findings showed that membranous urethral length and the anterior rectal wall movement toward the pubic bone during abdominal pressure were significant factors. The movement observed on the dynamic MRI during abdominal pressure was thought to reflect an effective urethral sphincter closure mechanism. Long membranous urethral length and an effective urethral sphincter closure mechanism during abdominal pressure were considered effective for favorable urinary continence after RARP. NS and Retzius-sparing were clearly shown to have an additive effect in preventing urinary incontinence.

Indexed as

RoboticsUrinary IncontinenceHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleProstateProstatectomyTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID36801949
PMCPMC9938893
OpenAlexW4321332203

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.