ArticleCentral European journal of urology2023
A comparative evaluation of radical prostatectomy using laparoscopic and open method in view of surgical margins.
Article in Central European journal of urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: A positive surgical margin (PSM) in the radical prostatectomy (RP) specimen is associated with biochemical recurrence (BCR) and the need for adjuvant radiation therapy, and is an analysis of surgical procedure quality. We present data describing the identification, anatomy, and management of PSM after RP performed via an open operation and laparoscopically. The aim of the study was to compare assessment of RP (open vs. laparoscopic) in terms of analysis of PSM in postoperative histopathological tissue. Material and methods: Patients with pT1 to pT3b prostate cancer with detailed surgical margin parameters and BCR status were analysed. The patients were divided into groups depending on the stage of neoplastic disease and the choice of operative procedure. Results: In total, we obtained data from 140 PC patients. Positive surgical margins were confirmed in 11 cases treated with open surgery and in 7 cases treated with laparoscopic procedure. There was no statistically significant (p >0.05) relationship between the frequency of positive margins and the type of procedure. There was no statistically significant (p >0.05) relationship between the frequency of positive margins and the type of procedure in subgroups according to the Gleason score. There was a statistically significant (p <0.05) relationship between the clinical stage of the tumor and the type of margin. This particularly refers to tumours with stage T3b (more numerous in the group of open surgeries) and T2c (more numerous in the laparoscopic group). Conclusions: There was no statistically significant correlation between the type of surgery and the incidence of a positive surgical margin.
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.