ArticleWideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques2025
Learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
Article in Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWhile robotic prostatectomies are gaining popularity, laparoscopic and open surgeries remain prevalent in Central and Eastern Europe due to their cost‑effectiveness. In Poland, many urology residents report insufficient laparoscopic training. This study retrospectively evaluated the learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).
aimThis paper aimed to assess the learning curve of a single resident performing extraperitoneal LRP. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe analyzed 72 patients who underwent LRP between 2016 and 2020 at a single center, divided into 5 groups (G1-G5) according to chronological order. The procedures were per‑ formed by a single urologist without on‑site supervision. Outcomes included operative duration, length of hospital stay, complications, transfusion rates, histopathology findings, biochemical recurrence, and urinary incontinence.
resultsPatient characteristics were similar across all groups. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age ranged from 61 (54-66) to 68 (66-70) years, and the median (IQR) prostate‑specific antigen con‑ centration, from 6.7 (5.4-8.5) to 15 (6.3-19.3) ng/ml. Higher Gleason scores were more common in the G3 and G4 groups (P = 0.05) than in the other groups. Surgery time decreased from 183 minutes in the G1 group to 130 minutes in the G5 group (P <0.001). The rates of positive surgical margins were the highest in the G3 and G4 groups (53.3% and 46.7%, respectively; P = 0.02). The rate of urinary continence improved from 66.7% in the G1 group to 86.7% in the G4 group (P = 0.36); however, without any significant difference among all groups. Biochemical recurrence rates tended to be lower in the G4 and G5 groups (6.7% and 8.3%, respectively), but the difference across all groups was nonsignificant. Grade III-V complications occurred only in the G1 group.
conclusionsSurgical outcomes improved after 15 procedures, and the oncological outcomes, after 45, with functional improvement observed later. Performing hundreds of surgeries may be required to achieve high proficiency in performing LRP.
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.