Kiś J, Góralczyk M, Sikora D, Stępień E, Drop B, Polz-Dacewicz M (2024) Can the epstein-barr virus play a role in the development of prostate cancer? Cancers. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers16020328
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Cao L, Yang Z, Qi L, Chen M (2019) Robot-assisted and laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer: perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore) 98:e15770
Jayaprakash D, Patel K, Mithi M, Lakshmi HN, Pandya S (2022) Versatility of 3D laproscopy for radical prostatectomy: a single tertiary cancer center experience. Indian J Surg Oncol 13:525–532
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE, Chou R, Glanville J, Grimshaw JM, Hróbjartsson A, Lalu MM, Li T, Loder EW, Mayo-Wilson E, McDonald S, McGuinness LA, Stewart LA, Thomas J, Tricco AC, Welch VA, Whiting P, Moher D (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372:n71
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Peterson J, Welch V, Losos M, and Tugwell P (2000). The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses.
Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336:924–926
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
McGrath S, Zhao X, Steele R, Thombs BD, Benedetti A (2020) Estimating the sample mean and standard deviation from commonly reported quantiles in meta-analysis. Stat Method Med Res 29:2520–2537
Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG (2003) Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 327:557–560
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Higgins JP, Thompson SG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21:1539–1558
Wang L, Li KP, Yin S, Yang L, Zhu PY (2023) Contrast-enhanced ultrasound versus conventional ultrasound-guided percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients with a non-dilated collecting system: results of a pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials. BMC Urol 23:93
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Sterne JA, Gavaghan D, Egger M (2000) Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 53:1119–1129
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Andras I, Crisan N, Gavrilita M, Coman RT, Nyberg V, Coman I (2017) Every setback is a setup for a comeback: 3D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy after robotic radical prostatectomy. J buon 22:87–93
Yilmazel FK, Sam E, Cinislioglu AE, Tor IH, Akkas F, Bedir F, Karabulut I, Aydin HR, Adanur S, Polat O (2022) Comparison of Perioperative, Oncological, and Functional Outcomes of Three-Dimensional Versus Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Preliminary Study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 32:304–309
Haapiainen H, Murtola TJ, Koskimäki J, Riikonen J, Pakarainen T, Haney CM, Raitanen M, Kaipia A (2023) Robot-assisted versus three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 12-month outcomes of a randomised controlled trial. BJU Int 132:505–511
Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Kapoor KK, Kumar A (2023) A randomized controlled study of robot-assisted versus 3D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with carcinoma prostate. Adv Urol 2023:4666116
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
von Hippel PT (2015) The heterogeneity statistic I(2) can be biased in small meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol 15:35
Oberlin DT, Flum AS, Lai JD, Meeks JJ (2016) The effect of minimally invasive prostatectomy on practice patterns of American urologists. Urol Oncol 34:255.e1–5
Lee SH, Seo HJ, Lee NR, Son SK, Kim DK, Rha KH (2017) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy has lower biochemical recurrence than laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Investig Clin Urol 58:152–163
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Carbonara U, Srinath M, Crocerossa F, Ferro M, Cantiello F, Lucarelli G, Porpiglia F, Battaglia M, Ditonno P, Autorino R (2021) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes. World J Urol 39:3721–3732
Ma J, Xu W, Chen R, Zhu Y, Wang Y, Cao W, Ju G, Ren J, Ye X, He Q, Chang Y, Ren S (2023) Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: the first separate systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies. Int J Surg 109:1350–1359
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Dirie NI, Wang Q, Wang S (2018) Two-dimensional versus three-dimensional laparoscopic systems in urology: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endourol 32:781–790
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Aykan S, Singhal P, Nguyen DP, Yigit A, Tuken M, Yakut E, Colakerol A, Sulejman S, Semercioz A (2014) Perioperative, pathologic, and early continence outcomes comparing three-dimensional and two-dimensional display systems for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy–a retrospective, single-surgeon study. J Endourol 28:539–543
Bove P, Iacovelli V, Celestino F, De Carlo F, Vespasiani G, Finazzi Agrò E (2015) 3D vs 2D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in organ-confined prostate cancer: comparison of operative data and pentafecta rates: a single cohort study. BMC Urol 15:12
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Bertolo R, Checcucci E, Amparore D, Autorino R, Breda A, Ramirez-Backhaus M, Dasgupta P, Fiori C, Rassweiler J, Liatsikos E, Porpiglia F (2018) Current status of three-dimensional laparoscopy in urology: An ESUT systematic review and cumulative analysis. J Endourol 32:1021–1027
Benelli A, Varca V, Simonato A, Terrone C, Gregori A (2017) Pentafecta rates of three-dimensional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: our experience after 150 cases. Urologia 84:93–97
Shuai H, Duan X, Wu T (2023) Comparison of perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes between 3D and 2D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Front Oncol 13:1249683
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Haapiainen H, Murtola TJ, Raitanen M (2021) 3D laparoscopic prostatectomy: A prospective single-surgeon learning curve in the first 200 cases with oncologic and functional results. Scandinavian J Urol 55:242–248
Zhang X, Yu J, Zhu J, Wei H, Meng N, Hu M, Tang J (2024) A meta-analysis of unilateral axillary approach for robotic surgery compared with open surgery for differentiated thyroid carcinoma. PLoS ONE 19:e0298153
Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Eastham JA, Kuroiwa K, Ohori M, Serio AM, Gorbonos A, Maru N, Vickers AJ, Slawin KM, Wheeler TM, Reuter VE, Scardino PT (2007) Prognostic significance of location of positive margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. Urology 70:965–969
Fu J, Luo W, Ding Y, Liu X, Fang W, Yang X (2023) Clinical study of 3D laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approaches. Am J Clin Exp Urol 11:549–558
PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Phahlamohlaka MN, Mdletshe S, Lawrence H (2018) Psychosexual experiences of men following radiotherapy for prostate cancer in Johannesburg. South Africa Health SA 23:1057
Yanagiuchi A, Miyake H, Tanaka K, Fujisawa M (2014) Significance of preoperatively observed detrusor overactivity as a predictor of continence status early after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Asian J Androl 16:869–872
Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar
Tobias-Machado M, Mitre AI, Rubinstein M, Costa EF, Hidaka AK (2016) Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy learning curve for experienced laparoscopic surgeons: does it really exist? Int Braz J Urol 42:83–89
Comments (0)