ArticleThe world journal of men's health2026
Robot-Assisted
Article in The world journal of men's health, 2026. 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.
- A bibliometric analysis of the robotic revolution in prostate cancer surgery: evolution, hotspots, and future directions.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Comparison of outcomes of robot-assisted vs. open or laparoscopic of radical prostatectomy: a population-based cohort study.Journal of robotic surgery · 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
purposeRadical prostatectomy remains the primary treatment for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Despite its use for over two decades, the benefits of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) remain unclear. We evaluated the surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes between RARP and open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis prospective cohort study included men who underwent radical prostatectomy between March 2016 and April 2020. We excluded patients who received preoperative androgen-deprivation therapy, had an initial prostate-specific antigen level of >50 ng/mL, had a clinical T stage of ≥T3b, and those aged under 50 or over 80 years. The primary outcome was the 90-day complication rate. Surgical and oncologic outcomes were compared. Continence and potency recovery were depicted using Kaplan-Meier curves and assessed using the log-rank test. To balance baseline characteristics, stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting (sIPTW) was used.
resultsAmong the 1,306 patients assessed, 1,055 were included after exclusion and adjustment using the sIPTW (RARP, n=835; RRP, n=220), with a median follow-up of 39 months. The RARP group had a significantly lower 90-day complication rate than the RRP group (8.9%
conclusionsThe findings indicate that RARP is associated with a better safety profile and surgical outcomes without compromising short-term oncologic outcomes than RRP. While continence recovery was comparable between the methods, RARP may offer superior potency recovery.
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.