ArticleIndian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India
Is 23-h discharge following robotic radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy feasible and safe in a quaternary care center in a developing country?
Article in Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of India. 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.
- Editorial comment: Is 23-h discharge following robotic radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy feasible and safe in a quaternary care centre in a developing country?Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
- What's inside.Indian journal of urology : IJU : journal of the Urological Society of IndiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP) or partial nephrectomy (PN) is often a daycare or overnight procedure in developed countries. This study assesses the safety and feasibility of discharging patients within 23 h after surgery in a developing country. Methods: This retrospective cohort study examined patients who underwent RP and PN between June 2022 and December 2023. We analyzed the clinical-pathological profiles of patients discharged within 23 h after surgery versus later. A single surgeon performed all surgeries, and an early recovery protocol was practiced. Results: Out of 71 PN patients, 62 (87.3%) were discharged within 23 h (of which, nine were discharged the same evening); the median stay for others was 3 days. Four patients had complications that delayed discharge, and one required readmission. Among 28 RP patients, 20 (71.5%) were discharged within 23 h; the median stay for others was 3 days. Two patients with complications had delayed discharge. There were no 30-day readmissions in the RP cohort. Factors such as comorbidities, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, and tumor staging did not predict discharge timing in either the RP or PN cohort. Furthermore, none required blood transfusions or conversion to open surgical procedures, and there were no recorded fatalities in either cohort. Conclusions: Twenty-three-hour discharge following robot-assisted RP and PN demonstrated both safety and feasibility in a developing country, which is contingent upon the implementation of an early recovery protocol in a tertiary or quaternary care setting. Effective preoperative counseling and interdepartmental communication are essential for success.
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.