Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40824469›Full record

SynthesisJournal of robotic surgery2025

Perioperative efficiency and clinical outcomes of single-port versus multi-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: an updated meta-analysis.

Xi Xiao, Mengjie Wang, Yang Liu, Li Wang, Chengyu You, Peng Yu, Qixiang Fang, Kun Zhao, Zhongze Zhou, Yan Tao and 1 more

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic ReviewComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of robotic surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. da VinciBMC surgery · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
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

11 authors.

Xi Xiao *The Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Mengjie Wang *The Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yang Liu *The Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Li WangThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Chengyu YouThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Peng YuThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Qixiang FangThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Kun ZhaoThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Zhongze ZhouThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China.
Yan TaoThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China. taoy07@lzu.edu.cn.
Zhilong DongThe Second Hospital & Clinical Medical School, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, China. dzl19780829@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relative benefits of single-port (SP) versus multi-port (MP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer remain uncertain, with conflicting evidence reported in the literature. This systematic review aimed to compare perioperative outcome metrics, oncologic efficacy, and functional recovery outcomes between SP-RARP and MP-RARP. A thorough literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library to locate English-language research published until June 2025. All statistical analyses, encompassing meta-analyses, were performed utilizing R software (version 4.3.1). Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% CIs were used to summarize continuous outcomes, while odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs were computed for dichotomous variables. Statistical significance was established at P < 0.05. The review protocol was registered prospectively in PROSPERO (CRD420251114408). A total of 15 studies involving 3,116 patients (SP-RARP: 1,525; MP-RARP: 1,591) were included. Patients undergoing SP-RARP experienced significantly lower estimated blood loss (WMD -41.36 (-68.79, -13.94); P = 0.003), shorter hospital stays (SMD -0.95 (-1.77, -0.13); P = 0.02), and earlier urinary catheter removal (WMD -1.77 (-2.88, -0.66); P = 0.002) compared with those receiving MP-RARP. SP-RARP was also associated with lower pain scores on the day of surgery (WMD -0.88 (-1.29, -0.48); P < 0.001) and reduced opioid use during hospitalization (OR 0.35 (0.22, 0.54); P < 0.001) and at discharge (OR 0.03 (0.01, 0.10); P < 0.001). Nonetheless, for functional outcomes related to potency and continence, along with perioperative complications, positive surgical margins, biochemical recurrence, and duration of surgery, no statistically significant differences were seen between the groups. SP-RARP offers advantages in reducing intraoperative blood loss, accelerating recovery, and improving postoperative pain control compared to MP-RARP. Although operative time is longer, both approaches provide comparable oncological and functional outcomes.

Indexed as

ProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsRobotic Surgical ProceduresBlood Loss, SurgicalHumansLength of StayMaleTreatment OutcomeFunctional outcomesMeta-analysisMulti-port robotRobotic-assisted radical prostatectomySingle port

Identifiers

PMID40824469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.