ArticleCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada2025
Long-term impact of posterior reconstruction urethrovesical anastomosis during robot-assisted prostatectomy A secondary analysis of a randomized cohort.
Article in Canadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada, 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.
- [Current status of prostate cancer screening research].Beijing da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University. Health sciences · 2026Review
- Automated recognition of surgical phases in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy using a Hiera-based vision transformer.BJU international · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe aimed to assess early and late continence rates post-robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), comparing posterior reconstruction (PR) urethrovesical anastomosis (UVA) to conventional urethrovesical anastomosis (C-UVA).
methodsConsecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing RARP underwent simple randomization to PR-UVA or C-UVA. Return to continence outcomes were assessed using a validated questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] Short Form-26) at baseline, two-, three-, four-, six-, eight-, and 12-month followups. Five-year outcomes were assessed by frequency of undergoing continence-improving procedures.
resultsA total of 163 patients were randomized 1:1 to PR-UVA or C-UVA from April 2014 to July 2015, and 140 patients completed followup. There were no significant clinical or functional differences between groups preoperatively. Using a continence definition of 0-1 pads/day, the continence rates for PR-UVA vs. C-UVA were 39% vs. 38% at two months, respectively (p=1.0), and 93% vs. 86%, respectively, at 12 months (p=0.3). Frequency of urine leak, quantity of pad use, subjective urinary control, and overall bother improved significantly in all patients during the 12-month study period (p<0.001); however, no difference was demonstrated between groups. Five-year results showed no statistically significant difference in the number of patients undergoing a continence-improving procedure (hazard ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval 0.40-3.65, p=0.7).
conclusionsPR-UVA failed to show a benefit in short-term return to urinary continence or need for an incontinence-improving procedure five years post-RARP.
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.