ArticleScientific reports2026
Effectiveness of pelvic floor rehabilitation after radical prostatectomy and continence recovery in relation to surgical technique.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The potential influence of surgical technique and pelvic floor rehabilitation on continence recovery continues to be debated. This prospective cohort study included 182 men undergoing robot-assisted or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. All patients were referred for physiotherapist-guided pelvic floor muscle training. Urinary incontinence was assessed using a standardized 1-h pad test and a three-stage UI grading system at 1, 3, and 6 months after catheter removal. Ordinal and logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of continence, including surgical technique, age, pathological features, and rehabilitation-related variables. Exploratory time-to-event analyses (Cox proportional hazards models) were also performed to assess the dynamics of continence recovery, with catheter removal as time zero and achievement of full continence (pad test ≤ 2 g) as the event. Patients undergoing RARP demonstrated higher odds of early full continence shortly after surgery (OR = 5.26; 95% CI 2.34-11.80; p < 0.001) and functional continence (OR = 4.00; 95% CI 1.96-8.14; p < 0.001). After adjustment for baseline incontinence severity, surgical technique was no longer an independent predictor of continence recovery. However, in multivariable analyses, baseline incontinence severity and timing of rehabilitation were the strongest independent predictors of continence recovery. Robotic prostatectomy is associated with a more favorable continence status at the start of rehabilitation, whereas continence recovery during physiotherapy is primarily determined by baseline incontinence severity and timely initiation of pelvic floor therapy rather than surgical approach. These results highlight the need to integrate precise surgical techniques with standardized, early, and individualized physiotherapy to optimize continence recovery and improving quality of life after radical prostatectomy.
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.