ArticleiScience2026
Functional outcomes and biochemical control after radical prostatectomy versus irreversible electroporation for localized prostate cancer.
Article in iScience, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Treatment selection for localized prostate cancer requires balancing oncologic control against urinary and sexual function. We retrospectively compared 32 men undergoing laparoscopic bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP) with 18 undergoing focal irreversible electroporation (IRE), using unweighted and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses. IRE was associated with shorter operative time and less frequent early urinary incontinence and sexual function decline. At 12 months after weighting, urinary incontinence occurred in 6.0% after RP and 0% after IRE, while sexual function decline occurred in 40.0% and 4.1%, respectively. Biochemical recurrence was more frequent after IRE than RP at 12 months (28.6% versus 8.0%). These findings suggest a trade-off between early functional preservation and biochemical control and should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating because of the retrospective single-center design, small sample, non-equivalent recurrence definitions, and short follow-up.
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.