Observational studyBMC urology2024
Comparison of the effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies based on complication rates: a retrospective observational study with administrative data from Switzerland.
Observational study in BMC urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Early Postoperative Outcomes with the ToumaiCancers · 2026Article
- Bibliometric analysis of deep learning for surgical instrument segmentation, detection and tracking in minimally invasive surgery.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- The Surgical Imprint: How Operative Trauma May Shape Radiation Tolerance After Prostatectomy.Cancers · 2025Article
- Factors Determining Postoperative Early Continence in Patients Undergoing Robotic Radical Prostatectomy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRadical prostatectomies can be performed using open retropubic, laparoscopic, or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. The literature shows that short-term outcomes (in particular, inpatient complications) differ depending on the type of procedure. To date, these differences have only been examined and confirmed in isolated cases based on national routine data.
methodsThe data was based on the Swiss Medical Statistics from 2016 to 2018 from a national survey of administrative data from all Swiss hospitals. Cases with the coded main diseases neoplasm of the prostate (ICD C61) and the main treatments of laparoscopic (CHOP 60.5X.20) or retropubic (CHOP 60.5X.30) radical prostatectomies were included, resulting in a total sample size of 8,593 cases.
resultsA procedure-related complication occurred in 998 cases (11.6%). By surgical procedure, complication rates were 10.1% for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy 9.0% for conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and 17.1% for open retropubic radical prostatectomy (p < 0.001). Conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies had a significantly lower risk of complications than retropubic procedures. Moreover, the risk of a procedure-related complication was almost twice as high in cases operated on retropubically; however, no significant difference was found between conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic cases. DISCUSSION: The use of a surgical robot showed no advantages in radical prostatectomies regarding procedure-related during the hospital stay. However, both conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopically operated radical prostatectomies show better results than open retropubic procedures. Further studies on the long-term course of patients based on claims data are needed to confirm the inherent benefits of surgical robots in tandem with them being increasingly employed in hospitals.
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.