본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Erectile function after laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

메타분석 1/5 보강
Asian journal of urology 2025 Vol.12(3) p. 281-289
Retraction 확인
출처

PICO 자동 추출 (휴리스틱, conf 4/4)

유사 논문
P · Population 대상 환자/모집단
6281 patients.
I · Intervention 중재 / 시술
Erectile function after laparoscopic
C · Comparison 대조 / 비교
robotic
O · Outcome 결과 / 결론
[CONCLUSION] Robotic-assisted surgery showed greater preservation of erectile function 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after radical prostatectomy. However, additional studies with meticulous methodological criteria are necessary for future analysis.

Pina AJ, Melo VC, Carlos VW, Tristão LS, Santos CL, Bernardo WM

📝 환자 설명용 한 줄

[OBJECTIVE] Prostate cancer is a common malignancy in men over 50 years old, and radical prostatectomy, particularly via laparoscopic and robotic-assisted techniques, significantly impacts quality of

🔬 핵심 임상 통계 (초록에서 자동 추출 — 원문 검증 권장)
  • 95% CI 0.03-0.17
  • 연구 설계 systematic review

이 논문을 인용하기

↓ .bib ↓ .ris
APA Pina AJ, Melo VC, et al. (2025). Erectile function after laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.. Asian journal of urology, 12(3), 281-289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2024.10.002
MLA Pina AJ, et al.. "Erectile function after laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.." Asian journal of urology, vol. 12, no. 3, 2025, pp. 281-289.
PMID 41049811 ↗

Abstract

[OBJECTIVE] Prostate cancer is a common malignancy in men over 50 years old, and radical prostatectomy, particularly via laparoscopic and robotic-assisted techniques, significantly impacts quality of life, especially in terms of erectile dysfunction. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the preservation of erectile function following robotic-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, with a separate analysis of randomized clinical trials and non-randomized studies.

[METHODS] This review was carried out using randomized and non-randomized studies involving adult patients diagnosed with localized prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and registered in PROSPERO. Applicable literature from PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature database was analysed. The bias in randomized clinical trials was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool, and observational studies were evaluated via the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager version 5.4.

[RESULTS] Our analysis included 13 studies involving 6281 patients. Comparative meta-analysis of non-randomized studies demonstrated that robotic techniques were significantly more effective in preserving erectile function at 3 months (risk difference [RD] 0.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.00-0.11; =0.040), 6 months (RD 0.10, 95% CI 0.03-0.17; =0.006), and 12 months postoperatively (RD 0.06, 95% CI 0.02-0.10; =0.002).

[CONCLUSION] Robotic-assisted surgery showed greater preservation of erectile function 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after radical prostatectomy. However, additional studies with meticulous methodological criteria are necessary for future analysis.

🏷️ 키워드 / MeSH 📖 같은 키워드 OA만

🏷️ 같은 키워드 · 무료전문 — 이 논문 MeSH/keyword 기반

🟢 PMC 전문 열기