ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Retzius-sparing vs. posterior urethral suspension: similar early-phase post-robotic radical prostatectomy continence outcomes.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Analysis of Functional and Oncological Outcomes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
- Surgical techniques for enhancing postoperative urinary continence in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a comprehensive review.International journal of surgery (London, England) · 2025Review
- The impact of prostate volume on Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with retrograde release of the neurovascular bundle.BMC urology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) is a risk of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP) which can be a frustrating problem for both surgeons and patients. We aim to compare short-term continence outcomes between patients undergoing Retzius Sparing RP (RS-RP) and those undergoing standard RP with the inclusion of a PUS suture technique and suprapubic tube (PUS-RP). A retrospective review of 105 consecutive patients who underwent RP was performed, comparing patients who underwent RS-RP and PUS-RP. Our main outcome was pad usage as a surrogate for SUI. Patients were evaluated 4 weeks following RP and again at approximately 3 months. Continence was defined as no pad usage or up to one safety pad per day. Risk factors associated with not being continent were identified using univariate and multivariate analyses. In our cohort, 52 patients underwent RS-RP and 53 patients underwent PUS-RP. The two groups had similar patient demographics. Although not statistically significant, there was a higher rate of a positive surgical margin in the RS-RP compared to PUS-RP (25% vs 15%, p = 0.204). At one month follow-up for PUS-RP and RS-RP, there was no significant difference in the frequency of continent men (69.2% vs. 76.9%, p = 0.302). At 3-month follow-up for the two groups of patients, again, there was no significant difference in the frequency of continence for PUS-RP and RS-RP (86.2% vs 88%, p = 0.824). Patients who underwent RS-RP had similar rates of continence to those patients undergoing PUS-RP in the short-term post-operative period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38315436What 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.