ReviewProstate international2025
A comparison of surgical outcomes between outpatient and inpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Prostate international, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oncological and perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical cystectomy: a real-world cohort study emulating a target trial.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- A bibliometric analysis of the most-cited studies on robotic nephrectomy versus laparoscopic nephrectomy: Citation trends and scientific influence.Investigative and clinical urology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Several institutions have reported their experience with outpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (O-RARP). However, it is unclear if the utilization of this approach represents an improvement over inpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (I-RARP). This meta-analysis sought to compare the surgical outcomes between O-RARP and I-RARP. Methods: For relevant articles, three electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, were searched from their inception until April 30, 2022. A meta-analysis has been reported in line with PRISMA 2020 and AMSTAR guidelines. The risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (MD) were applied for the comparison of dichotomous and continuous variables with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: of the 297 retrieved abstracts, 12 underwent full-text review, and 11 studies were included in the final analysis, comprising a total cohort of 2,875 cases of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (892 O-RARP cases and 1,983 I-RARP cases). Compared to I-RARP, the O-RARP group had lower mean operative time (MD = -9.4 minutes, 95% CI -15.1 to -3.7, Conclusions: This meta-analysis demonstrates that O-RARP is a safe and feasible option for patients undergoing surgery for localized prostate cancer. Further studies are needed to better evaluate optimal patient selection, associated healthcare costs, and patient-reported 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.