ReviewProstate cancer and prostatic diseases2026
Clinical and surgical management of recto-urinary fistula after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review on current evidence.
Review in Prostate cancer and prostatic diseases, 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
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundManagement of rectourinary fistula (RUF) is challenging due to limited data and variability in presentation and treatment. We conducted a systematic review of radical prostatectomy (RP)-related RUF to assess clinical features, diagnostics, treatments, and outcomes, and to propose a structured algorithm to guide management.
methodsWe conducted a systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines to evaluate the clinical presentation, diagnostic strategies, management approaches, and outcomes of RUF following RP. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science was performed from database inception to January 2025. Data were extracted on patient demographics, symptoms, diagnostic modalities, management strategies, surgical repair techniques and treatment outcomes.
resultsA total of 455 cases of RUF following RP were identified across 34 studies. The reported incidence of RUF ranged from <0.01% to 1.5%. The most frequent presenting symptoms were urine leakage per rectum (60.7%), fecaluria (44.1%), and pneumaturia (50.0%). Fecal and/or urinary diversion was utilized in over 60% of cases, with a median stoma duration of 3 months and an indwelling urinary catheter duration of 1 month. Conservative management (observation, fluid replacement and antibiotic therapy) was attempted in a minority of patients and was generally associated with success rates below 50%. Surgical repair was performed in nearly all cases, with the transperineal and transsphincteric approaches being the most commonly employed techniques. The median time to fistula closure ranged from 0.5 to 30 months, with reported surgical success rates varying between 41% and 100%. We propose a management flowchart based on our clinical experience, outlining the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to rectal injury and RP-related RUF.
conclusionsRUF after RP remains a challenging complication, often requiring stepwise management. Conservative treatments rarely succeed, and surgery is often necessary. Our proposed algorithm aims to standardize the approach to RI and RUF, guiding treatment decisions and improving outcomes.
Identifiers
42069871What 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.