ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2026
Do all patients need a urethral catheter after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy?
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To evaluate the safety and early functional outcomes of a urethral catheter-free protocol during extraperitoneal single-site robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (essRARP), enabled by suprapubic catheter (SPC) drainage placed through the existing incision, compared with urethral catheter (UC) drainage. We retrospectively analysed 217 consecutive men undergoing essRARP (June 2023-July 2025) at a single institution. Patients received either a urethral catheter-free protocol with SPC drainage (SPC/UC-free, n = 129) or UC drainage (UC, n = 88). In the SPC/UC-free group, after vesicourethral anastomosis and a negative 150 mL saline leak test, a 14-Fr SPC was inserted under direct vision via the existing incision (no additional skin punctures/incisions), and the UC was removed intraoperatively. Pain (VAS) was assessed on postoperative day 1, at discharge, and on catheter removal day. Immediate continence was defined as 0 pad/day within 24 h after catheter removal. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of immediate continence. Baseline and intraoperative characteristics were comparable before matching. In the unmatched cohort, pain scores were similar on postoperative day 1 and catheter removal day, but lower at discharge in the SPC/UC-free group (median [IQR] 1.0 [1.0-2.0] vs 1.5 [1.0-2.0]; P < 0.001). Immediate continence was higher in the SPC/UC-free group (57.4% [74/129] vs 25.0% [22/88]; P < 0.001). After propensity score matching, 87 matched pairs were identified, and the main findings remained directionally consistent, with the SPC/UC-free group showing lower discharge-day pain scores and a higher rate of immediate urinary continence. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, the urethral catheter-free protocol remained independently associated with immediate urinary continence (OR 3.94, 95% CI 2.07-7.48; P < 0.001). Two SPC/UC-free patients developed self-limiting gross haematuria; there were no urinary tract infections, urethral stricture, or readmissions. Urethral catheter-free drainage after essRARP using SPC via the existing incision improved early comfort and immediate continence without an evident short-term safety penalty.
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.