Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40493202›Full record

Observational studyWorld journal of urology2025

Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted vs. open prostatectomy: a real-life nationwide study.

Grégoire Robert, Patrick Blin, Franck Bladou, Jérémy Jové, Eric Ouattara, Magali Rouyer, Cécile Droz-Perroteau, Laurent Piazza, Nathalie Preaubert

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative StudyObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in World journal of urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04587284 (Economic Evaluation of Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy vs Conventional Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy and Open Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy in Prostate Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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.

NCT04587284 unknown statusnot on this map

Economic Evaluation of Robot-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy vs Conventional Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy and Open Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy in Prostate Cancer: a Real-life Study Based on the French National Healthcare Data System (SNDS)

TypeobservationalSponsorUniversity Hospital, BordeauxRan2020 to 2023Enrolled84,667ConditionsProstate Cancer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors.

Grégoire RobertUrology Department, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France. gregoire.robert@chu-bordeaux.fr.
Patrick BlinBordeaux PharmacoEpi, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France.
Franck BladouUrology Department, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France.
Jérémy JovéBordeaux PharmacoEpi, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France.
Eric OuattaraMedical Information Department, Medical information Analysis and Coordination Unit (UCAIM-DIM), University Hospital Centre Bordeaux, Bordeaux, 33000, France.
Magali RouyerBordeaux PharmacoEpi, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France.
Cécile Droz-PerroteauBordeaux PharmacoEpi, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France.
Laurent PiazzaInnovation and Medico-Economic Evaluation, Direction de la recherche clinique et de l'innovation, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France.
Nathalie PreaubertInnovation and Medico-Economic Evaluation, Direction de la recherche clinique et de l'innovation, Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, 33000, France.

Funding

French Ministry of Health as part of the 2018 Medico-Economic Research Program (PRME-18-0124)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo compare long-term progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) between patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP). MATERIALS AND

methodsA cohort study was designed in the French nationwide claims database with a follow-up of 5 to 8 years. All men undergoing surgery for prostate cancer between 2012 and 2015 were selected. RARP cohort included all men (n = 10,040) from hospitals using a robot for at least 95% of their surgeries. ORP cohort included all men (n = 17,911) from hospitals without robot equipment. PFS and OS were compared using Cox proportional hazards model for 1:1 matched patients on high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS), and for all patients adjusted on inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) using the hdPS.

results5,677 men could be matched with a median follow-up of 6.7 years. PFS and OS were longer with RARP compared to ORP (HR = 0.85 [95%CI: 0.79-0.91, p < 0.001] and 0.79 [0.68-0.92, p = 0.003], respectively). Index hospitalisation duration was shorter for RARP (6.7 ± 4.0 days vs. 9.9 ± 5.0 days, p < 0.01). At follow-up, care for urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction were less frequent with RARP (29.7% vs. 37.3%; p < 0.01 and 52.1% vs. 56.3%; p < 0.01, respectively). Results were similar with all patients after IPTW adjustment except no difference for erectile dysfunction care.

conclusionCompared to ORP, RARP performs better with respect to long-term survival outcomes and urinary complications.

trial registrationENCePP (EUPAS33290). CLINICALTRIALS: gov (NCT04587284).

Indexed as

ProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresAgedCohort StudiesComparative Effectiveness ResearchFranceHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeOpen surgeryOutcomesOverall survivalProstate cancerRadical prostatectomyRobotic surgery

Identifiers

PMID40493202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.