Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41226853›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2025

Assessment of Surgical Quality in Radical Prostatectomy: Review of Objective Intraoperative and Functional Evaluation Scales.

Jakub Kempisty, Krzysztof Balawender, Oskar Dąbrowski, Karol Burdziak

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2025. 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

4 authors.

Jakub KempistyKlinika Urologii i Urologii Onkologicznej, Uniwersytecki Szpital Kliniczny im. Fryderyka Szopena w Rzeszowie, ul. Szopena 2, 35-055 Rzeszow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-0744-7134
Krzysztof BalawenderDepartment of Normal and Clinical Anatomy, Medical College of Rzeszow University, 35-615 Rzeszow, Poland.
Oskar DąbrowskiKlinika Urologii i Urologii Onkologicznej, Uniwersytecki Szpital Kliniczny im. Fryderyka Szopena w Rzeszowie, ul. Szopena 2, 35-055 Rzeszow, Poland.
Karol BurdziakKlinika Urologii i Urologii Onkologicznej, Uniwersytecki Szpital Kliniczny im. Fryderyka Szopena w Rzeszowie, ul. Szopena 2, 35-055 Rzeszow, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Radical prostatectomy remains a cornerstone treatment for localized prostate cancer. While oncological control is essential, functional outcomes such as urinary continence and erectile function play a critical role in patient satisfaction and quality of life. Despite the growing emphasis on surgical quality, no standardized intraoperative scoring system has been universally adopted. This narrative review summarizes current approaches to evaluating the technical quality of radical prostatectomy and associated functional outcomes. It focuses on objective intraoperative assessment tools and functional evaluation scales used in clinical research and surgical education. A non-systematic literature search was conducted using the PubMed and Scopus databases to identify relevant intraoperative assessment tools (e.g., GEARS, PACE, and OSATS), functional scales (e.g., IIEF, EPIC, and pad test), and outcome reporting systems. Articles were reviewed for scale structure, clinical applicability, validation status, and limitations. Several tools have been developed to evaluate surgical skills in minimally invasive surgery, yet few are specific to radical prostatectomy. Most rely on subjective surgeon assessment or delayed functional outcomes, limiting their utility for intraoperative feedback. Video-based assessment is promising but underutilized. A gap remains for a prostatectomy-specific, reproducible, and real-time assessment scale. There is a pressing need for validated tools that bridge the gap between surgical technique and functional outcomes. Current methods lack specificity and reproducibility. Development of an objective, intraoperative scoring system may support surgeon feedback, quality improvement, and improved patient counseling.

Indexed as

functional outcomesintraoperative assessmentnerve-sparingradical prostatectomyrobotic surgerysurgical educationsurgical quality

Identifiers

PMID41226853
PMCPMC12610866

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.