Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40376533›Full record

ArticleTranslational andrology and urology2025

Extraperitoneal laparoscopic versus transperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic approaches during radical prostatectomy for low-risk or intermediate-risk prostate cancer.

Yi Yang, Xiaohong Han, Xingkai Wang, Xinhui Liao, Jieqing Chen, Zhongfu Zhang, Jianting Wu, Jiou Li, Mutong Chen, Hongbing Mei

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Translational andrology and urology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Yi Yang *Department of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Xiaohong Han *Department of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Xingkai Wang *Department of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Xinhui LiaoDepartment of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Jieqing ChenDepartment of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Zhongfu ZhangDepartment of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Jianting WuDepartment of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Jiou LiDepartment of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Mutong ChenDepartment of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.
Hongbing MeiDepartment of Urology, Shenzhen Second People's Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Shenzhen University, Shenzhen, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (E-LRP) and transperitoneal robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (TRA-LRP) are two types of radical prostatectomy widely used at present, but the comparative study between them is limited. We aimed to compare E-LRP with TRA-LRP in the treatment of low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer (PCa). Methods: From June 2020 to May 2024, in our department, a total of 80 patients with low- or intermediate-risk PCa, including 45 cases who received E-LRP (E-LRP group) and another 35 cases who received TRA-LRP (TRA-LRP group), were enrolled in our research. All patients were followed up for 6-24 months. Perioperative parameters, erectile function, urinary continence, and biochemical recurrence were compared between the 2 groups. Results: Patients in the TRA-LRP group had longer operative times (165.3 Conclusions: Compared with E-LRP, TRA-LRP can reduce the blood loss and PSM rate in low-risk or intermediate-risk PCa, and may help patients regain early continence and potency after operation. It may be superior in reducing intraoperative risk, improving oncological outcomes, and early postoperative rehabilitation.

Indexed as

Extraperitoneallaparoscopicprostatectomyrobottransperitoneal

Identifiers

PMID40376533
PMCPMC12076224

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.