Evidence Hub

A Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial Examining the Impact of the Retzius-sparing Approach on Early Urinary Continence Recovery After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Dalela D, Jeong W, Prasad MA, Sood A, Abdollah F, Diaz M, Karabon P, Sammon J et al.

European urology, 2017

120 participants · 213 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Retzius-sparing (posterior) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) may expedite postoperative urinary continence recovery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term (≤3 mo) urinary continence (UC), urinary function (UF), and UF-related bother outcomes of posterior RARP compared with standard anterior approach RARP.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 120 patients aged 40-75 yr with low-intermediate-risk prostate cancer (per the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines) underwent primary RARP at a tertiary care institution.

INTERVENTION: Eligible men were randomized to receive either posterior (n=60) or anterior (n=60) RARP.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Primary outcome was UC (defined as 0 pads/one security liner per day) 1 week after catheter removal. Secondary outcomes were short-term (≤3 mo) UC recovery, and UF and UF-related bother scores (measured by the International Prostate Symptom Score [IPSS] and IPSS quality-of-life scores, respectively) assessed at 1 and 2 wk, and 1 and 3 mo following catheter removal. Continence outcomes were objectively verified using 24-hr pad weights. UC recovery was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression; UF and UF-related bother outcomes were compared using linear generalized estimating equations (GEEs). Perioperative complications, positive surgical margin, and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS) represent secondary outcomes reported in the study.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 120 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free