ArticleBJU international2026
Function drives 1-year decision regret in radical prostatectomy: a multicentre prospective study.
Article in BJU international, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo identify contemporary drivers of postoperative decision regret 1 year after radical prostatectomy (RP). PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this prospective, multicentre study, patients undergoing robot-assisted RP (RARP) or retropubic open RP (ORP) for localised prostate cancer at seven centres in Germany and Austria (2022-2024) completed questionnaires preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively. Decision regret was assessed using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS). Functional outcomes were measured with European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer quality of life questionnaire - 25-item prostate cancer specific (EORTC QLQ-PR25) symptom scores at 1 year postoperatively. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of high surgical decision regret (DRS score ≥10). Sensitivity was tested via propensity score matching (PSM).
resultsA total of 419 patients completed the surveys (58% RARP, 42% ORP) at 1 year postoperatively. Surgical decision regret was low (mean [SD] DRS score 9.0 [15.4]). Erectile dysfunction was the outcome that most patients self-reported as worse than expected (54% [221/404]), followed by urinary incontinence (23% [96/414]) and oncological cure (10% [39/397]) in a questionnaire on their retrospective perception. The ORP patients reported higher regret regarding surgical approach than RARP patients (mean [SD] DRS score 11.3 [17.1] vs 7.4 [13.9], P = 0.02). In a multivariate analysis, high urinary symptom burden (odds ratio [OR] 2.4, P = 0.009) and impaired sexual functioning (OR 2.8, P = 0.002) independently predicted high surgical decision regret whereas surgical approach and prostate-specific antigen recurrence did not. Sensitivity analyses via PSM confirmed these independent predictors.
conclusionsSurgical decision regret after RP is primarily driven by postoperative functional outcomes rather than oncological results or surgical approach. Optimising functional recovery and managing patient expectations are key strategies to reduce regret in prostate cancer surgery.
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.