ArticleBMC anesthesiology2026
Nomogram prediction model for delayed extubation in patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.
Article in BMC anesthesiology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDelayed extubation after anesthesia can lead to adverse clinical outcomes. We aimed to identify the risk factors for delayed extubation in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and to develop a visualized nomogram prediction model for clinical use.
methodsA total of 624 patients were enrolled and divided into training group, validation group, and temporal validation group. The training group was utilized to develop a nomogram, whereas the validation group and temporal validation group were used to assess its performance. LASSO regression was employed to refine variables and select predictors, and a nomogram was constructed using multivariate logistic regression. The performance of the model was internally validated using calibration and receiver operating characteristic curves. Additionally, decision curve analysis and clinical impact curves were used to assess the clinical utility of the model.
resultsPatients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy between January 2022 and April 2024 were included and divided into a training group (n = 389), a validation group (n = 98), and a temporal validation group (n = 137). Logistic regression identified cerebral infarction, pulmonary disease, coronary heart disease, age, and intraoperative hypotension as independent predictors of delayed extubation. A nomogram constructed based on these factors demonstrated excellent predictive performance, with area under the curve values of 0.763 (95% CI: 0.717–0.810) in the training group, 0.811 (95% CI: 0.726–0.897) in the validation group, and 0.769 (95% CI: 0.689–0.848) in the temporal validation group. Across all three groups, the model demonstrated a good fit, as indicated by a non-significant P-value from the Hosmer–Lemeshow test, and the calibration curves indicated a strong alignment between the predictions and actual observations. Furthermore, decision curve analysis and clinical impact curve demonstrated the clinical efficiency and benefits of the prediction model.
conclusionThis study identified key risk factors for delayed extubation and established an effective predictive nomogram with high discriminative power and clinical applicability for predicting the risk of extubation delay in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
trial registrationThe Medical Ethics Committee of Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital granted ethical approval for this research(grant number: 2024–742-01).
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.