ArticleCureus2024
Radical Prostatectomy Survivorship: What Are We Really Asking?
Article in Cureus, 2024. 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.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Urinary incontinence, sexual dysfunction, and bowel dysfunction are well-recognized cancer survivorship outcomes affected by radical prostatectomy (RP) in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa).The aim of this study was to audit the thoroughness of outpatient discussions and documentation of survivorship outcomes for patients who have undergone RP. Methods This was a retrospective audit of all 253 radical prostatectomies conducted at two tertiary-level Australian institutions (Monash Medical Centre and Alfred Hospital), over a five-year period between 2014 and 2018. Electronic medical records were reviewed across five time points: preoperative and then six weeks, three months, six months, and 12 months post-RP.The main outcomes measured were rates of documented discussions of urinary incontinence, sexual dysfunction, and bowel dysfunction. Results At the initial six-week postoperative review, there was an 86%, 47%, and 27% probability that urinary, sexual, and bowel functions were discussed and documented. When averaging across the four postoperative time points, from six weeks to 12 months, there was a 73%, 45%, and 14% respective rate of documented discussion for each survivorship outcome. Sexual and bowel function discussions were less frequently documented in men over 65 years of age compared with those under 65 years of age by 16% (p < 0.001) and 8% (p = 0.003), respectively. Conclusion Sexual and bowel dysfunction were less frequently discussed and documented in the follow-up of our cohort of RP patients compared with urinary continence outcomes.
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.