ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2024
Development and validation of a novel comorbidity score specific for prostate cancer patients treated with robotic platform and its implication on DaVinci single-port system.
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.
- Comparison of different scoring systems for prediction of postoperative complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Article
- Navigating the Intricacies of Robotic Pylorus-Preserving Pancreaticoduodenectomy Using the da Vinci SP (Single Port) System.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Comorbidity Level and Risk of 90-day and 18-month Complications Among Patients Undergoing Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer in the Military Health System.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To develop and validate a novel Comorbidity score for Robotic Surgery (CRS) in predicting severe complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Furthermore, we investigated the impact of the surgical platform (Multi-Port - MP vs Single-Port - SP) according to this score. We included 2085 ("development cohort") and 595 ("validation cohort") patients undergoing RARP at two tertiary referral centers between 2014 and March 2024 in a retrospective study. Statistical analyses included validation of the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) to predict 30-day severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3a), development and external validation of CRS using calibration plots and decision curve analysis. Lastly, locally weighted scatterplot smoothing (LOWESS) analysis was used to graphically explore the impact of the robotic platform according to novel CRS. CCI exhibited limited predictive ability for severe complications (60% in the validation cohort). In multivariable logistic regression analyses testing the correlation between each condition included in CCI and severe complications, diabetes and myocardial infarction resulted as independent predictors (OR 1.75 [95%CI 1.05-2.82]; OR 1.92 [95%CI 1.26-2.88]) and were subsequently fitted into a multivariable logistic model including age, previous abdominal surgery and obesity (BMI > 30). The resulting predictive model demonstrated superior discrimination and clinical net benefit in predicting severe complications compared to CCI (AUC 64 vs 60%). At LOWESS analysis, SP platform was associated with lower risk of severe complications as CRS increased compared to MP system. The validated CRS showed better accuracy compared to CCI in predicting severe complications after RARP. Additionally, the use of SP robotic platform may reduce the risk of severe complications in highly comorbid patients according to CRS.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39508969What 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.