Evidence Hub

Effect of puboprostatic ligament preservation during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy on early continence: Randomized controlled trial

W. Ratanapornsompong, Suthep Pacharatakul, P. Sangkum, C. Leenanupan, W. Kongcharoensombat

Asian Journal of Urology, 2020

46 participants · 6 citations

Abstract

Objective To prove the effectiveness of puboprostatic ligament-preserving robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical (RARP) on enhancing early continence. Methods Ninety-two patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate scheduled for RARP from April 2018 to January 2019 were prospectively single-blinded and randomized into two groups, standard RARP (Group A) and puboprostatic ligament-sparing RARP (Group B). The outcomes were continent status at Foley catheter removal and 3 months after surgery using the score from the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF), pad usage, pathological margin status, blood loss, operative time, and complications. Results Ninety-six patients were randomized (46 patients in each group), with a mean±SD age of 67.30±6.07 years. There were no differences in baseline characteristics. At 3 months after surgery, ICIQ-UI SF score (mean±SD) in Group A was significantly higher than Group B (8.74±4.28 vs. 6.93±3.96, p=0.038) but no difference at Foley catheter removal. Group A also had a significant higher score for interference with daily life (median [interquartile range, IQR]: 4 [1, 5] vs. 2 [0, 4]; p=0.041) and higher pad use (median [IQR]: 2 [0, 3] vs. 1 [1, 2]; p=0.041) at 3 months. One case in Group A had complete or severe incontinence (>5 pads/day) at 3 months. Groups A and B did not exhibit significant difference in margin status (p=0.828). There were no differences in operative…

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: 46 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