Outcomes of Retzius-sparing versus conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A KSER update series systematic review and meta-analysis

Doo Yong Chung, Hae Do Jung, Do Kyung Kim, Min Ho Lee, Sin Woo Lee, Sunghyun Paick, Joo Yong Lee and Seung Hyun Jeon

PLOS ONE, 2022, vol. 17, issue 5, 1-17

Abstract: Background: Robotic‐assisted radical prostatectomy(RARP) is widely used to surgically treat of localized prostate cancer. Among RARP, retzius-sparing techniques(RS-RARP) are implemented through douglas pouch, not the existing conventional approach(C-RARP). We conducted an updated systematic review and meta-analysis including recent published papers. Materials & methods: Systematic review was performed following the PRISMA guideline. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were searched up to August 2021. We conducted meta-analysis as follows; Participants, patients with biopsy-proven PCa; Interventions, Patients underwent C-RARP or RS-RALP; Outcomes, comparison of continence recovery rate, positive surgical margins(PSM), complication, operation time and estimated blood loss(EBL) included for analysis. Results: Thirteen studies with a total of 2917 patients were included for meta-analysis. Among them, three were randomized controlled trials (RCT) studies and the rest were non-RCT studies. Incontinence was analyzed with zero pad and safety pad, respectively. There showed a statistically significant advantage for RS-RARP in terms of continence recovery at 1 month(0 pad; OR 0.28, (0.16–0.47), safety-pad; OR 0.12 (0.07–0.22), p

Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268182 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 68182&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0268182

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268182

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().