Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
You have accessJournal of UrologyProstate Cancer: Localized: Surgical Therapy III (MP58)1 May 2024MP58-16 OUTCOMES OF THE NOVEL SURGICAL TECHNIQUE PRESERVATION OF THE PELVIC STABILIZED STRUCTURES ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A PROPENSITY SCORE MATCHING STUDY Weitao Zheng, Zhenhua Liu, Qiang Wei, and Lu Yang Weitao ZhengWeitao Zheng , Zhenhua LiuZhenhua Liu , Qiang WeiQiang Wei , and Lu YangLu Yang View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/01.JU.0001008852.83523.41.16AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the early continence and oncological outcomes of the novel surgical technique preserving the pelvic stabilized structures (PPSS) compared to the traditional Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy (VIP). METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled PCa patients who underwent RARP in our hospital. Propensity score matching and binary logistic regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: The propensity score matched cohort successfully matched 198 patients (99 patients in both the PPSS and the VIP group). Multivariable binary logistic regression analyses indicated that PPSS was an independent predictor for higher continence rates immediately (OR: 2.44, 95% CI: 1.36–4.37, p=0.0028), at 2 weeks (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.17–3.93, p=0.0130), 1 month (OR: 3.48, 95% CI: 1.73–7.02, p=0.0005) and 3 months (OR: 5.67, 95% CI: 1.84–17.43, p=0.0025) compared to the VIP group. PPSS was an independent predictor for a lower risk of positive surgical margin (PSM) rate (OR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.24-0.95, p=0.0349). PPSS did not significantly affect early biochemical recurrence (BCR) at 3 months (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.29-1.43, p=0.2784) or 6 months (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.29-1.29, p=0.1976). CONCLUSIONS: PPSS significantly improved early urinary continence and does not affect early oncological outcomes in high-risk and very high-risk PCa patients. Download PPTDownload PPTDownload PPT Source of Funding: This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 81974099, 82170785, 81974098, 82170784), programs from Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province (Grant Nos. 21GJHZ0246) © 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 211Issue 5SMay 2024Page: e953 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2024 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.Metrics Author Information Weitao Zheng More articles by this author Zhenhua Liu More articles by this author Qiang Wei More articles by this author Lu Yang More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Zheng et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: