ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2023
Efficacy and safety evaluation of complete intrafascial prostatectomy in suspected prostate cancer patients with dysuria: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of Modified Extraperitoneal Laparoscopic Intrafascial Radical Prostatectomy in Prostate Cancer and Analysis of Factors Influencing Postoperative Urinary Continence Recovery.APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Suspected localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients with dysuria Complete intrafascial prostatectomy (CIP) can remove the whole prostate gland with the maximal retain of adjacent normal tissues around the prostate, and can be applied in some suspected localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients with dysuria. However, precious few studies have assessed the efficacy and safety of CIP in these patients without preoperative needle biopsies. Methods: In this retrospective single-arm cohort study, all 22 suspected PCa patients with dysuria who underwent CIP at our hospital were enrolled. The clinical data including age, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), free-serum PSA, prostate volume, perioperative and postoperative complications were collected. The PSA level at 6 weeks after CIP and recoveries of urinary continence and erectile function were acquired in the follow-up procedures, and were used as the main measurements of efficacy and safety for CIP respectively. Results: The patients had an average age of 71.91±8.29 years and an average preoperative PSA level of 10.75±4.25 ng/mL. The operations for all 22 patients were successfully completed. The average operation time was 135.20±41.44 min (range, 40.0-215.0 min), and the average blood loss volume was 128.64±145.09 mL. In total, 17 patients (77.27%) had PCa confirmed by postoperative pathology, and 5 patients (22.73%) had benign prostatic hyperplasia. The PSA level dropped to 0.010±0.004 ng/mL at 6 weeks after surgery. According to the loose criteria to assess urinary incontinence, the patients achieved continence rates of 63.6% immediately after the operation, 95.5% at 1 month, and 100% at 3 months. According to the strict criteria, the continence rates immediately, and at 1, 3, 6, and 9 months after surgery were 27.3%, 63.6%, 90.9%, 95.5%, and 100%, respectively. None of the patients complained of urinary obstruction symptoms after surgery. Before CIP, all the patients had erectile dysfunction and an International Index of Erectile Function 5 (IIEF-5) score of 9.64±5.91. After surgery, the patients had IIEF-5 scores at 3, 6, and 12 months of 5.45±4.43, 6.95±5.30, and 7.57±5.69, respectively. Conclusions: Although the study had some limitations, CIP may be a prudent option for patients with suspected localized PCa who also present with dysuria.
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.