ArticleJSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons
Effect of Urethrovesical Anastomotic Leakage on Incontinence Following Robotic Radical Prostatectomy.
Article in JSLS : Journal of the Society of Laparoendoscopic Surgeons. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the impact of urethrovesical anastomotic leakage (UAL) on urinary incontinence (UI) in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Methods: Data from 86 patients who underwent RARP between 2017 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. Cystography was performed on the seventh day, and urinary catheters were removed for patients with mild leakage. For patients with major leakage, cystography was repeated on the 14th day. Patients with UI and those using pads were identified separately and assessed for associated risk factors. Results: The UAL rate was 32.6%, with an equal division between minor and major UAL. The average an follow-up period was 36 ± 22 months. UI was present in 28 patients (32.6%), of whom 11 (12.8%) required pads, while 17 patients (19.8%) had mild UI and did not use pads. Seventy-five patients (87.2%) did not use pads. Among pad users, 6 (7.0%) used 1 pad, 2 (2.3%) used 2 pads, and 3 (3.5%) used 3 pads daily. UAL did not significantly impact UI ( Conclusion: UAL was not found to influence mid to long-term UI. However, in patients with major UAL, prolonged catheterization may have a protective effect against UI. Randomized studies comparing catheter removal on the seventh day versus later removal in patients with UAL could provide further insight.
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.