Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39929994›Full record

SynthesisProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2025

Impact of transperitoneal anterior, retzius-sparing, extraperitoneal, transvesical and perineal approaches on urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.

Vincenzo Ficarra, Marta Rossanese, Romito Ilaria, Gianluca Giannarini, Alexandre Mottrie, Christian Thomas, Felix Chun, Antonio Galfano, Firas Abdollah, Ettore Di Trapani

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Advances in Techniques in Radical Prostatectomy.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025
    Review
  13. Article
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

10 authors.

Vincenzo FicarraDepartment of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Messina, Messina, Italy. vincenzo.ficarra@unime.it.ORCID 0009-0009-2658-2858
Marta RossaneseDepartment of Human and Pediatric Pathology "Gaetano Barresi", Urologic Section, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Romito IlariaDepartment of Human and Pediatric Pathology "Gaetano Barresi", Urologic Section, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Gianluca GiannariniUrology Unit, Academic Medical Centre "Santa Maria della Misericordia", Udine, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6995-246X
Alexandre MottrieDepartment of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis Hospital, Aalst, Belgium.
Christian ThomasDepartment of Urology, Medical Faculty Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Felix ChunDepartment of Urology, University Hospital Frankfurt, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany.
Antonio GalfanoDepartment of Urology, ASST Grande Ospedale Metropolitano Niguarda, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2656-5531
Firas AbdollahVUI Center for Outcomes Research, Analysis, and Evaluation, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI, USA.
Ettore Di TrapaniDepartment of Human and Pediatric Pathology "Gaetano Barresi", Urologic Section, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUrinary incontinence significantly impacts on health-related quality of life of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. In the last decades, several approaches (extraperitoneal, Retzius-sparing (RS), perineal and, transvesical) for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) have proposed with the aim to improve functional outcomes in comparison with transperitoneal, anterior ones.

methodsWe performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies published in English language, in the last ten years, comparing the different approaches used to perform RARP. We included only studies reporting urinary continence rates at different follow-up time points. From each eligible study, we extracted the number of analyzed patients; the study design; the continence definition; and, when available, immediate, 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-mo urinary continence rates. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan version 5.4 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, United Kingdom, UK). The Odds Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using the generic inverse variance. A p value of <0.05 was set as significance level when comparing studies.

resultsThe meta-analyses of studies comparing anterior, transperitoneal RARP and RS-RARP in terms of immediate (OR = 3.73; 95% CI: 2.17-6.43; p < 0.0001), 1-mo (OR = 4.16; 95% CI: 2.68-6.48; p < 0.00001), 3-mo (OR 4.71; 95% CI: 3.70-6.00; p < 0.0001), 6-mo (OR 4.12; 95% CI: 2.95-5.75; p < 0.00001) and 12-mo (OR = 3.25; 95% CI: 1.76-5.99; p < 0.00001) urinary continence rates showed a statistically significant advantage in favor of RS approach. However, a sub-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials showed overlapping urinary continence rates between the two approaches at 6-mo (OR = 1.99; 95% CI: 0.90-4.42; p = 0.09) and 12-mo (OR = 1.36; 95% CI: 0.43-4.31; p = 0.60) after surgery. The meta-analysis of studies comparing extraperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches showed that 6-mo urinary continence rates were overlapping between the two approaches (OR = 1.18; 95% CI: 0.85-1.65; p = 0.32). The meta-analysis of studies comparing single-port (SP) and multi-port (MP) RARP showed comparable 6-mo urinary continence rates (OR = 0.93; 95% CI 0.65-1.33; p = 0.69).

conclusionsWithin the limitations of mainly low to moderate quality of evidence, the RS  approach offers significant advantages compared to an anterior, transperitoneal, approach in terms of urinary continence recovery at different follow-up time points in patients who underwent MP-RARP. MP perineal and transvesical approaches need to be further tested and might be of interest in the setting of SP-RARP. Our meta-analysis showed comparable results between SP- and MP-RARP in terms of urinary continence rates.

Indexed as

ProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresUrinary IncontinenceHumansMaleOrgan Sparing TreatmentsPerineumQuality of LifeRecovery of FunctionTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.