ArticleThe Canadian journal of urology2025
Robotic-assisted super-extended pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer: safety and pathologic findings.
Article in The Canadian journal of urology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionWe examined the pathology and safety outcomes associated with the extent of pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with high-risk prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe retrospectively identified men with prostate cancer who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with pelvic lymph node dissection between May 2016 and September 2021. Cases were categorized using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes (38571) for extended lymph node dissection and super-extended lymph node dissection (38572). Using logistic regression, we compared the groups on a number of factors, including recurrence.
resultsSuper-extended lymph node dissection had significantly higher median prostate-specific antigen and National Comprehensive Cancer Network risk classification prior to surgery. Significant differences were observed in the pathologic T stage and pathology grade group. Time on robot was significantly longer for the super-extended group, while estimated blood loss was lower. No differences were observed in length of stay or any complication-related variable. Super-extended had significantly higher node positivity (36.1% vs. 7.6%, p < 0.001) and recurrence. 10.0% of super-extended cases had node positivity in the aortic bifurcation, the common iliac, or the pre-sacral chains that would have been missed with an extended dissection. 2.2% of patients had node positivity in these chains only.
conclusionsSuper-extended lymph node dissection is safe and feasible for patients with high-risk prostate cancer. Further research is needed to better understand its clinical benefit and to further inform optimal patient selection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40567086What 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.