SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025
Does transurethral resection of the prostate before robot-assisted radical prostatectomy have adverse effects on patients diagnosed with prostate cancer: a comparative evidence-based analysis?
Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Perioperative functional and oncologic outcomes of percutaneous thermal ablation (PTA) versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) for cT1 renal tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Pooled it
- TAPESTRY study: impact of prior transurethral resection of the prostate on outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy After Rezūm: A Case Report and Literature Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Safe to Spare? Predictors of Oncological Safety for Nerve-Sparing Technique during Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in High-Risk Prostate Cancer. Insight from a High Volume Center with Centralized mpMRI Review.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of UrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In clinical practice, it is not uncommon for a history of trans-urethral resection of the prostate (TURP) to complicate a future robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). This study aims to determine if prior TURP adversely affects outcomes in subsequent RARP, analyzing perioperative, functional, and oncological results between the procedures. Research published in English before September 2024 was systematically reviewed using Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and the EMBASE. Review Manager 5.4 was used to do the meta-analysis, included 15 studies, with 869 patients who underwent RARP following TURP and 5,879 patients who underwent RARP alone. Compared to standard RARP, RARP following TURP was associated with extended operative time (OT) (WMD: 26.63 min, 95% CI: 16.79-36.48, P < 0.00001), increased estimated blood loss (EBL) (WMD: 19.85 ml, 95% CI: 9.22-30.48, P = 0.0003), longer hospital stay(LOS) (WMD: 0.52 days, 95% CI: 0.28-0.77, P < 0.0001), and extended catheter removal duration (WMD: 0.18 days, 95% CI: 0.02-0.35, P = 0.03). The overall nerve-sparing success rate was lower (OR: 0.53, 95% CI: 0.35-0.78, P = 0.001), with reduced bilateral nerve-sparing success rates (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.39-0.84, P = 0.005). Patients in the TURP group had higher rates of bladder neck reconstruction (OR: 8.38, 95% CI: 5.80-12.10, P < 0.0001) and major complications (Clavien grade ≥ 3) (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.10-3.41, P = 0.02). Furthermore, the positive surgical margin (PSM) rate was elevated in the prior-TURP group (OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.02-1.53, P = 0.03). Quality-of-life outcomes indicated that patients undergoing RARP after TURP experienced lower urinary incontinence recovery rates at one year (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.34-0.97, P = 0.04) and reduced continence recovery rates (OR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.44-0.81, P = 0.007). Nevertheless, there were no notable differences between the two groups in terms of the rates of transfusions, unilateral nerve-sparing, lymphadenectomy, minor complications (Clavien grade < 3), or biochemical recurrence (BCR) after a year. Although RARP after TURP is achievable, it is notably more complex. Findings suggest that while the surgical difficulty is increased, oncological and functional outcomes for the prior-TURP group remain comparable to the non-TURP group. This research aims to provide clinicians with data to support informed decision-making when treating individuals who have experienced TURP in the past.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39976864What 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.