The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
POTENCY, CONTINENCE AND COMPLICATION RATES IN 1,870 CONSECUTIVE RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMIES
Abstract
PURPOSE: We update results in a series of consecutive patients treated with anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy regarding recovery of erections, urinary continence and postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One surgeon performed anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy on 1,870 men, using the nerve sparing modification when feasible. We evaluated recovery of erections and urinary continence in men followed for a minimum of 18 months. Patients who were not reliably potent before surgery, did not undergo a nerve sparing procedure, or received hormonal therapy or postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy were excluded from the analysis of potency rates but not of continence rates. Other postoperative complications were evaluated for the entire patient population. RESULTS: Recovery of erections occurred in 68% of preoperatively potent men treated with bilateral (543 of 798) and 47% treated with unilateral (28 of 60) nerve sparing surgery. Recovery of erections was more likely with bilateral than with unilateral nerve sparing surgery in patients less than 70 years old (71 versus 48%, p<0.001) compared with patients with age 70 years old or older (48 versus 40%, p = 0.6). Recovery of urinary continence occurred in 92% (1,223 of 1,325 men) and was associated with younger age (p<0.0001) but not with tumor stage (p = 0.2) or nerve sparing surgery (p = 0.3). Postoperative complications occurred in 10% of patients overall and were associated with older age (p<0.002) but the incidence declined significantly with increasing experience of the surgeon (p<0.0001). There was no operative mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy with the nerve sparing modification can be performed with favorable results in preserving potency and urinary continence. Better results are achieved in young men with organ confined cancer. Other complications can be reduced with increasing surgeon experience.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
Cited by
FACTORS PREDICTING RECOVERY OF ERECTIONS AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
RABBANI, F., STAPLETON, A. M. F., KATTAN, M. W., WHEELER, T. M., & SCARDINO, P. T. (2000) · Journal of Urology · doi:10.1016/s0022-5347(05)66921-2 · Cited by 487
Dubbelman, Y. D., Dohle, G. R., & Schröder, F. H. (2006) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2006.06.009 · Cited by 222
Sivarajan, G., Prabhu, V., Taksler, G. B., Laze, J., & Lepor, H. (2014) · European Urology · doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2013.08.019 · Cited by 84
Rambhatla, A., Kovanecz, I., Ferrini, M., Gonzalez-Cadavid, N. F., & Rajfer, J. (2008) · International Journal of Impotence Research · doi:10.1038/sj.ijir.3901588 · Cited by 51
The 2018 Revision to the Process of Care Model for Evaluation of Erectile Dysfunction
Mulhall, J. P., Giraldi, A., Hackett, G., Hellstrom, W. J. G., Jannini, E. A., Rubio-Aurioles, E., Trost, L., & Hassan, T. A. (2018) · The Journal of Sexual Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.jsxm.2018.06.005 · Cited by 40
Metadata
- Authors
- CATALONA, W. J., CARVALHAL, G. F., MAGER, D. E., & SMITH, D. S.
- Venue
- Journal of Urology
- Published
- 1999-08
- Volume
- 162
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 433-438
- ISSN
- 0022-5347 (ISSN-L)
- 1527-3792
- OpenAlex
- W1993540005
- Cited by
- 716
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 21.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.