ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2024
Internal urethral sphincter reconstruction with anterior bladder neck tube for robotic and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: improving early return of continence.
Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07694752 (An Observational Study of the Relationship Between the Urethral Internal Sphincter Ring and Prostate Base Morphology Using MRI-DTI Fiber Tracking), which is not on this 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.
An Observational Study of the Relationship Between the Urethral Internal Sphincter Ring and Prostate Base Morphology Using MRI-DTI Fiber Tracking
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In recent years, despite several surgical techniques having been applied, the early incontinence rate after radical prostatectomy (RP) remains high. In this study, we reconstructed an internal urethral sphincter (IUS) with anterior bladder neck tube (ABNT) to improve early return of continence and find a more effective technique for early urinary incontinence after RP. Methods: In this study, 96 previous patients who did not receive an ABNT between October 2018 and May 2020 were compared as historical controls (the control group). A total of 210 consecutive patients underwent robotic or laparoscopic RP with ABNT between May 2020 and February 2023 (the ABNT group). The inclusion criteria included Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score 0-1 and localized prostate cancer (clinical stages cT1-3, cN0, cM0). The exclusion criteria included patients with diabetes, neurologic diseases, previous pelvic operations, symptoms of urinary incontinence, prior radiation, focal therapy, or androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. ABNT was reconducted with a U-shaped flap from the anterior wall of the bladder neck, and was then anastomosed with the urethra. In the control group, the bladder outlet was directly anastomosed with the urethra. Continence, as defined if 0 pads were used per day and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Short Form (ICIQ-SF) score ≤6, was assessed at 1, 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks after catheter removal. At 2 weeks after catheter removal, urethral pressure profilometry (UPP) and upright urethrography were performed to evaluate the function of ABNT in the ABNT group. Results: More patients in the ABNT group were continent than those in the control group at 1 week (85.2% Conclusions: The ABNT technique significantly improved early return of continence in comparison with the no ABNT technique, especially the immediate continence. The ABNT technique reconstructed the functional IUS with acceptable urethral stricture. The limitations of the present study include that the comparison was conducted retrospectively with a historical cohort and lack of randomization, and the single center setting. A prospective, randomized, and multicenter evaluation is expected.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.