ArticleScientific reports2025
The early therapeutic efficacy of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with combined anterior and posterior approach: a cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Analysis of Functional and Oncological Outcomes.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2026Article
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
This study aims to compare the perioperative outcomes, postoperative urinary control rates, and positive surgical margin (PSM) rates of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy using a combined anterior and posterior approach (AP-RARP) with those of the Retzius-sparing (RS-RARP) and standard anterior (anterior-RARP) approaches in prostate cancer treatment. We collected and analyzed medical data from prostate cancer patients who underwent one of these three approaches. No statistically significant differences were observed in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, transfusion rates, anastomotic leakage, or postoperative infection rates among the groups. PSM rates were comparable across the three groups in patients with T2 stage disease, whereas AP-RARP and anterior-RARP demonstrated lower PSM rates compared to RS-RARP in patients with T3a stage disease. The RS-RARP group demonstrated lower immediate and 1-month postoperative continence rates than the AP-RARP and anterior-RARP groups. At 3 months postoperatively, continence rates in both RS-RARP and AP-RARP groups were lower than those observed in the anterior-RARP group, with no significant differences among the groups at 6 months postoperatively. In conclusion, AP-RARP appears to be a viable surgical option for prostate cancer treatment.
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.