Observational studyBJU international2026
Intraoperative margin assessment using fluorescence confocal microscopy during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a first experience.
Observational study in BJU international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Delphi consensus on ex vivo fluorescence confocal microscopy in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.BJU international · 2026Article
- Retrograde robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a patient with localized prostate cancer: a case report.Frontiers in surgery · 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the feasibility of adopting fluorescence confocal microscopy (FCM) for intraoperative assessment of positive surgical margins (PSMs) during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in a real-world clinical setting. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe conducted a prospective observational study including consecutive patients undergoing RARP between October 2023 and November 2024 in whom intraoperative margin assessment was performed using FCM (Histolog® Scanner; SamanTree Medical SA, Lausanne, Switzerland). After exclusion of initial learning-curve cases and non-interpretable scans, a per-patient analysis was performed. Prostate specimens were scanned ex vivo intraoperatively, and digital images were reviewed remotely and in real time by an experienced uropathologist blinded to final pathology. Final histopathological evaluation served as the reference standard. Diagnostic performance metrics included sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative PV (NPV), and overall accuracy, assessed both for any PSM and for clinically significant PSMs (≥3 mm).
resultsA total of 101 patients were included in the final analysis. The median (interquartile range) overall time from prostate extraction to intraoperative report was 13 (6-16) min. At final pathology, 17 patients (17%) had PSMs. For detection of any PSM, FCM demonstrated a sensitivity of 88.2%, specificity of 91.7%, PPV of 68.2%, and NPV of 97.5%, with an overall diagnostic accuracy of 91.1%. When restricting the analysis to clinically significant PSMs (≥3 mm), diagnostic performance improved, with sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of 93.8%, 91.8%, 68.2%, and 98.7%, respectively, and an overall accuracy of 92.1%.
conclusionsIntraoperative surgical margin assessment using FCM is feasible and demonstrates good diagnostic accuracy compared with final histopathology, with rapid turnaround times compatible with routine surgical workflows. Diagnostic performance improves when clinically relevant PSM length thresholds are applied. Larger multicentre studies and randomised trials are warranted to determine whether FCM-guided intraoperative decision-making can improve oncological and functional outcomes after RARP.
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.