SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2023
Perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy previous transurethral resection of prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials.
Synthesis 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 10 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Robotic-assisted versus video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for non-small cell lung cancer after neoadjuvant immunotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Perioperative safety and efficacy of minimally invasive vs. open thymectomy for large thymomas: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the comparative effectiveness and short-term outcomes of the KangDuo and da Vinci robotic platforms in colorectal cancer surgery.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of total robotic distal gastrectomy and robot-assisted distal gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Postoperative functional complications and quality of life following robot-assisted prostatectomy and radiotherapy in localized prostate cancer: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Comparison of efficacy and safety between robotic-assisted and open surgery in treating neurogenic bladder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- TAPESTRY study: impact of prior transurethral resection of the prostate on outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy After Rezūm: A Case Report and Literature Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Recent Advances in Diagnosing and Treating Post-Prostatectomy Urinary Incontinence.Annals of surgical oncology · 2024Review
- Outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in men after trans-urethral resection of the prostate: a matched-pair analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The influence of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) on patients who have previously undergone transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) versus TURP-naive patients is still debatable. The present study aimed to compare perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes of RARP between TURP and Non-TURP groups. We systematically searched the databases such as Science, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library database to identify relevant studies published in English up to August 2022. Review Manager was used to compare various parameters. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022378126). Eight comparative trials with a total of 4186 participants were conducted. The TURP group had a longer operative time (WMD 22.22 min, 95% CI 8.48, 35.95; p = 0.002), a longer catheterization time (WMD 1.32 day, 95% CI 0.37, 2.26; p = 0.006), a higher estimated blood loss (WMD 23.86 mL, 95% CI 2.81, 44.90; p = 0.03), and higher bladder neck reconstruction rate (OR 8.02, 95% CI 3.07, 20.93; p < 0.0001). Moreover, the positive surgical margin (PSM) was higher in the TURP group (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.12, 1.98 p = 0.007). However, there was no difference between the two groups regarding the length of hospital stay, transfusion rates, nerve-sparing status, complication rates, long-term continence, potency rates and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Performing RARP on patients who have previously undergone TURP is a safe procedure. Furthermore, the current findings demonstrated that the TURP group had comparable oncologic and long-term functional outcomes to the Non-TURP group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36929480What 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.