Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38812920›Full record

ArticleEuropean urology open science2024

Urinary and Sexual Impact of Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: Reporting of Patient-reported Outcome Measures in the First Year after Radical Prostatectomy in a Contemporary Multicentre Cohort in the United Kingdom.

Joshua Bridge, Muhieddine Labban, Alexander P Cole, Busola Adebusoye, Sarah C Smith, Evangelia Protopapa, Neil McCartan, Chris Brew-Graves, Quoc-Dien Trinh, Kevin Hamer and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European urology open science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Predictors of successful erectile function using intracavernosal injection in post-prostatectomy men with erectile dysfunction.Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. The contemporary management of prostate cancer.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Joshua BridgeDivision of Surgical & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Muhieddine LabbanDivision of Urological Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Alexander P ColeDivision of Urological Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Busola AdebusoyeDivision of Surgical & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Sarah C SmithDepartment of Health Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Evangelia ProtopapaDepartment of Health Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Neil McCartanDivision of Surgical & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Chris Brew-GravesDivision of Surgical & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
Quoc-Dien TrinhDivision of Urological Surgery and Center for Surgery and Public Health, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Kevin HamerMy Medical Records, University Hospital Southampton, Southampton, UK.
Sue MallettNational Cancer Imaging Translational Accelerator, Division of Medicine, University College of London, London, UK.
Jan van der MeulenDepartment of Health Services Research & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Caroline M MooreDivision of Surgical & Interventional Science, University College London, London, UK.
TrueNTH Post Surgery UK Investigators

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background and objective: Radical prostatectomy (RP) is an established treatment for localised prostate cancer that can have a significant impact on urinary and sexual function, with recovery over time. Our aim was to describe functional recovery in the first year after RP, reporting descriptive outcomes alongside validated patient-reported outcome measure scores (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite, EPIC-26). Methods: Men undergoing RP between September 2015 and November 2019 completed EPIC-26 at baseline and 1, 3, 6, and 12 mo. Key findings and limitations: Overall, 2030 men consented to participation, underwent RP, and completed EPIC-26. At baseline, 97% were pad-free (1928/1996; 95% confidence interval [CI] 96-97%) and 77% were leak-free and pad-free (1529/1996; 95% CI 75-78), with a median EPIC-26 incontinence domain score of 100 (interquartile range [IQR] 86-100). At 12 mo, 65% were pad-free (904/1388; 95% CI 63-68%) and 42% were leak-free and pad-free (583/1388; 95% CI 39-45%), with a median EPIC-26 score of 76 (IQR 61-100). While one in three men reported wearing a pad at 12 mo, fewer than one in ten men needed more than 1 pad/d. At baseline, 1.9% reported a "moderate or big problem" with urine leakage, which increased to 9.7% at 12 mo. At baseline, the median sexual domain score among 1880 men was 74 (IQR 43-92) and 52% had erections sufficient for intercourse without medication (975/1880; 95% CI 50-54%). Among these 975 men, 630 responded at 12 mo, of whom 17% reported sufficient erections for intercourse (105/630; 95% CI 14-20%), without medication in 6% (37/630; 95% CI 4-8%) and needing medication in 11% (68/630; 95% CI 9-13%); the median EPIC-26 domain score was 26 (IQR 13-57). Conclusions and clinical implications: Reporting of functional outcomes after RP in terms of easily understood concepts such as pad-free and leak-free status, and erections with and with medication, alongside the classical report using EPIC-26 domain scores, increases the understanding of RP recovery patterns over the first year. Patient summary: At 12 months after surgery for prostate cancer, one in ten men reported a moderate or big problem with urine leakage and one in five men reported sufficient erections.

Indexed as

Patient-reported outcome measuresProstate cancerRadical prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID38812920
PMCPMC11134924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.