ArticleBMC cancer2025
Robotic prostatectomy for large-volume prostates in prostate cancer: a retrospective analysis of 50 cases (>100 ml).
Article in BMC cancer, 2025. 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.
- Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for large-volume prostates (>100 mL): perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes from a 5-year multicenter cohort.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Emerging biomarkers in prostate cancer diagnosis and treatment: Insights into genetic, RNA and metabolic markers (Review).International journal of oncology · 2026Review
- "Robotic-assisted surgical management of a post-brachytherapy rectoprostatic fistula: a case report".BMC urology · 2025Article
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
Abstract
objectiveTo assess the clinical application and efficacy of robotic radical prostatectomy in 50 cases of large-volume (> 100 ml) prostate cancer.
methodA retrospective analysis was conducted on 50 patients with large-volume (> 100 ml) prostate cancer who underwent robotic radical prostatectomy from June 2020 to August 2023. Patient ages ranged from 55 to 77 years (mean: 66.5 ± 10.5 years). Total PSA levels ranged from 7.9 to 98.5 ng/ml (mean: 18.7 ± 9.3 ng/ml), and the f/t PSA ratio ranged from 0.12 to 0.94 (mean: 0.35 ± 0.21). Gleason scores were: 15 scored 7, 24 scored 8, 10 scored 9, and 1 scored 10. Preoperative evaluations included lab tests, pelvic MRI, and whole-body bone scans. Patients without surgical contraindications underwent robotic radical prostatectomy.
resultsAll surgeries were completed without conversion to open surgery or major vascular injuries. Operative time ranged from 80 to 150 min (mean: 105 min). Blood loss ranged from 30 to 450 ml (mean: 110 ml), with no transfusions required. Postoperative hospital stays ranged from 2 to 8 days (mean: 4.5 days). Catheter removal occurred between 3 and 7 days postoperatively (mean: 4 days). Time to first flatus ranged from 1 to 3 days (mean: 1.5 days). Two cases had postoperative lymphatic leakage. Pathology revealed positive surgical margins in 3 cases, with stage distribution of 22 in T2a, 15 in T2b, 7 in T3a, and 6 in T3b; 2 cases had positive lymph nodes. Follow-up ranged from 2 to 26 months (median: 12.5 months). The one-year biochemical recurrence rate was 7.9% (3/38), and the one-year urinary continence satisfaction rate was 92.1% (35/38).
conclusionRobotic radical prostatectomy for large-volume prostate cancer, despite its surgical challenges, is a safe and feasible approach. With sufficient surgical experience and case volume, satisfactory outcomes can be achieved.
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.