Observational studyJournal of robotic surgery2026
Teaching in radical prostatectomy is safe: a multicenter prospective registry analysis.
Observational study in Journal of robotic surgery, 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.
- Adoption of MRI-guided Prostate Cancer Diagnostics and Surgical Outcomes: A Prospective Multicenter Registry Study.European urology open science · 2026Article
- Changing Face of Radical Prostatectomy: A Nationwide Registry Study of Case-Mix, Surgical Evolution, and Outcomes.Cancers · 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To evaluate the impact of teaching during radical prostatectomy in a nationwide prospective registry, assessing whether teaching influences perioperative or pathological outcomes. Data were extracted from the Swiss Urology Prostatectomy Registry, a nationwide quality-monitoring program including all certified training centers. Teaching was defined as procedures performed by a supervised trainee as primary operator. Baseline and perioperative outcomes were compared descriptively, and multivariable regression models assessed associations between teaching status and perioperative and pathological outcomes. A total of 7,607 men underwent radical prostatectomy between 2020 and 2025, of whom 825 (10.8%) were teaching cases. In multivariable analyses, teaching operations were associated with a higher likelihood of any 30-day complication (OR 1.41; 95% CI 1.09–1.82; p = 0.008) and longer operative time, with an adjusted mean increase of 31 min (95% CI 26–37; p < 0.001). Teaching status was not associated with severe complications (Clavien–Dindo ≥ III; OR 0.62; 95% CI 0.24–1.36; p = 0.283), transfusion requirement (OR 1.56; 95% CI 0.36–4.60; p = 0.478), positive surgical margins (OR 0.99; 95% CI 0.81–1.22; p = 0.960), nerve-sparing (OR 1.12; 95% CI 0.90–1.39; p = 0.306), or lymph node yield (adjusted mean difference + 0.5 nodes; 95% CI − 0.3 to 1.4; p = 0.226). Teaching during radical prostatectomy is safe and does not compromise surgical or pathological outcomes. Although longer operative times were observed, supervised trainee involvement can be safely integrated into structured training programs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41910818What 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.