Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40945279›Full record

SynthesisClinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil)

Partial prostatectomy in prostate cancer: a systematic review of current evidence.

Caio Mazzonetto Teófilo de Moraes, Catharina Lyra, Alice Matos Fontes, Jose de Bessa Junior, William Carlos Nahas, Leopoldo Alves Ribeiro Filho, Caio Vinicius Suartz

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Caio Mazzonetto Teófilo de MoraesHospital das Clínicas da Universidade de São Paulo (HCUSP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil. Electronic address: caio.v_suartz@hotmail.com.
Catharina LyraUniversidade Federal da Bahia (UFBA), Salvador, BA, Brazil.
Alice Matos FontesUniversidade Nove de Julho (UNINOVE), São Bernardo do Campo, SP, Brazil.
Jose de Bessa JuniorUniversidade Estadual de Feira de Santana, Feira de Santana, BA, Brazil.
William Carlos NahasUniversidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Leopoldo Alves Ribeiro FilhoInstituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo (ICESP), Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Caio Vinicius SuartzNorthern Ontario School of Medicine University, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the current evidence in the literature about partial prostatectomy as a treatment for localized prostate cancer.

methodsA systematic search of nine databases was conducted up to December 2024 to identify studies involving patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent partial prostatectomy reporting clinical epidemiological characteristics, diagnostic strategies, histopathological findings, tumor staging, functional and oncological outcomes. The primary outcome was biochemical recurrence rate. Secondary outcomes were overall survival, disease-free survival, erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence, and perioperative complications. The extracted data were systematically synthesized.

resultsThe authors analyzed five studies with a total of 48 patients (three prospective and two retrospective), all with low- or intermediate-risk disease. The mean surgical duration ranged from 129.2 to 208 min, with a single Clavien-Dindo Grade III complication reported. Only one study defined and reported biochemical recurrence, with a rate of 28 %. Urinary continence was preserved in 92 %-100 % of cases, while erectile function in 40 %-100 % ‒ which may represent a point of concern for this procedure. Overall survival and disease-free survival were consistently reported at 100 %. The lack of standardized reporting and the absence of randomized clinical trials prevented the performance of a meta-analysis and hindered the applicability of the findings to clinical practice.

conclusionRandomized clinical trials are still needed to provide stronger evidence regarding partial prostatectomy, as current data remain insufficient to support its routine use. With further research, partial prostatectomy may become an option for patients with favorable and intermediate-risk disease with unilateral lesions and concordance between magnetic resonance imaging and biopsy findings. Until then, radical prostatectomy remains the cornerstone of treatment for this patient profile.

Indexed as

ProstatectomyProstatic NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalErectile DysfunctionHumansMaleNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPostoperative ComplicationsTreatment OutcomeUrinary IncontinenceFocal therapyPartial prostatectomyProstate cancerProstate neoplasmSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID40945279
PMCPMC12834066

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.