41 Predictors of complete nerve sparing during robot assisted radical prostatectomy

Schatloff, Oscar; Chauhan, Sanket; Valéro, R.; Sivaraman, Ananthakrishnan; Ko, YH; Kameh, Darian; Palmer, Kenneth J.; Patel, Vinay

doi:10.1016/s1569-9056(11)61369-9

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although it is more challenging to perform SP tasks, SP cases' average active console time is shorter than that of MP. The amount of workflow interruption is the same, resulting in a reduction in the total operation time (21,22).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Efficacy and safety of single port robotic radical prostatectomy and multiport robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Wei¹,

Ji²,

Zuo³

et al. 2021

Transl Androl Urol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of single port (SP) robot radical prostatectomy and multiport (MP) robot radical prostatectomy.Methods: Using the China National Knowledge database, EMBASE, Cochrane library, PubMed, and other databases to obtain relevant research, SP robot radical prostatectomy and MP robot radical prostatectomy were comprehensively evaluated. The software used to evaluate the impact of the results in the selected articles was Review Manager 5.2. Deviation analysis, forest plot analysis, and sensitivity analysis were carried out for the collected data.Results: A total of 8 related studies that met the criteria were finally included. The data showed that the operation time of MP in the control group was significantly longer than that in the SP group [mean difference (MD) =−13.29; 95% confidence interval (CI): (−17.35, −9.23); P<0.00001; I 2 =50%]. The duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay for SP surgery was shorter than that for MP surgery [MD =−18.30; 95% CI: (−29.17, −7.42); P=0.0010; I 2 =94%]. The blood loss of SP surgery was less than that of MP surgery [MD =−15.54; 95% CI: (−28.37, −2.71); the total effective rate was 0.02; I 2 =0%]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between SP and MP surgery [risk ratio (RR) =0.95; 95% CI: (0.55, 1.63); P=0.85; I 2 =0%]. At the same time, the sensitivity analysis and funnel plot showed that this study was robust and publication bias was limited.Discussion: Our results show that SP Robotic radical prostatectomy is superior to MP Robotic radical prostatectomy in terms of efficacy and safety. SP robot radical prostatectomy is worthy of wide promotion.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…With the progress of the past 20 years, Robotic surgery has become the mainstream of urology (22,23). Reducing the size and number of incisions in laparoscopic or Robotic surgery has been a secondary objective, which aims to reduce the incidence of adverse events and to provide complex surgery with minimal invasiveness (24)(25)(26).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%