Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40731851›Full record

ReviewMedicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)2025

Advances in Techniques in Radical Prostatectomy.

Hui Miin Lau, Liang G Qu, Dixon T S Woon

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. 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

3 authors.

Hui Miin LauDepartment of Urology, Peninsula Health, Frankston, VIC 3199, Australia.ORCID 0009-0004-2651-3821
Liang G QuDepartment of Urology, Peninsula Health, Frankston, VIC 3199, Australia.
Dixon T S WoonDepartment of Surgery, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its development in 1904, radical prostatectomy (RP) has remained a fundamental surgical option in the management of localised prostate cancer. Over time, continuous advancements in surgical techniques have improved oncological outcomes while reducing functional complications. This narrative review explores the evolution of RP, depicting its progression from the traditional open approach to minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic-assisted techniques. Key developments in RP techniques, including nerve-sparing, bladder neck-sparing and Retzius-sparing techniques as well as enhanced perioperative management, have contributed to reduced postoperative complications, namely incontinence and erectile dysfunction. Additionally, technological innovations such as augmented reality, utilising indocyanine green for improved visualisation of prostatic boundaries and illuminare-1 to easily identify nerves intraoperatively, artificial intelligence, and novel molecular imaging technologies such as PSMA PETs for improved margin assessment are shaping the future of RPs. Despite these advancements, challenges persist, including a steep learning curve associated with newer techniques, disparities in access due to cost considerations, and a lack of standardised outcome measures across different surgical approaches. This review provides insight into current trends, ongoing challenges, and future directions that may further refine surgical precision, enhance patient safety, and improve long-term treatment success in prostate cancer management.

Indexed as

ProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsHumansLaparoscopyMalePostoperative ComplicationsRobotic Surgical Proceduresprostate cancerradical prostatectomy

Identifiers

PMID40731851
PMCPMC12300103

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.