ArticleScientific reports2024
Novel nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with endopelvic fascia preservation and long-term outcomes for a single surgeon.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
- Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Analysis of Functional and Oncological Outcomes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Association Between Intraoperative Prostate Bed Blood Flow and Postoperative Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.The Prostate · 2026Article
- Review of Neurovascular Reconstruction During Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy.Current urology reports · 2026Review
- Engineering NIR Probes to Enhance Affinity and Clinical Workflow Compatibility for Prostate Cancer Imaging.Angewandte Chemie (International ed. in English) · 2026Article
- The Nerve-Sparing Quality (NSQ) Score: A Novel Intraoperative Scoring System for Assessing Nerve-Sparing Quality During Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy-A Concept and Feasibility Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Assessment of Surgical Quality in Radical Prostatectomy: Review of Objective Intraoperative and Functional Evaluation Scales.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Engineering NIR probes to enhance affinity and clinical workflow compatibility for prostate cancer imaging.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Commentary on "Exploring patient decision regret following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective cohort study".Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although novel techniques for avoiding incontinence during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy have been developed, long-term oncological outcomes are unknown. The objective of this study was to determine the long-term oncological outcomes and functional outcomes of novel nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with endopelvic fascia preservation for a single surgeon. Data from 100 patients who underwent structure-preserving prostatectomies performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively analyzed. The median console time was 123 min. Bilateral nerve-sparing was performed in 43% of patients underwent, and 57% underwent unilateral nerve-sparing surgery. Most patients (96%) reached complete pad-zero urinary continence by one year after surgery. Satisfactory erectile function was achieved in 97% of patients who underwent bilateral nerve-sparing surgery, and 80% of patients who underwent unilateral nerve-sparing surgery. The surgical margin was positive for 25% of patients, and the biochemical recurrence-free rate at 5 years was 77%. The cancer-specific survival rate was 100% during the median follow-up period of 4.5 years. Clavien-Dindo grade III complications occurred in 1% of cases. The outcomes for novel nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with endopelvic fascia preservation were similar to previously reported oncological outcomes, with satisfactory functional outcomes. This operative method may be useful for patients who are eligible for nerve-sparing surgery.
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.