A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Summarizing the evidence for robotic-assisted bladder neck reconstruction: Systematic review of patency and incontinence outcomes. | LitMetric

Objective: Bladder neck contracture and vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis are difficult to manage endoscopically, and open repair is associated with high rates of incontinence. In recent years, there have been increasing reports of robotic-assisted bladder neck reconstruction in the literature. However, existing studies are small, heterogeneous case series. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of robotic-assisted bladder neck reconstruction to better evaluate patency and incontinence outcomes.

Methods: We performed a systematic review of PubMed from first available date to May 2023 for all studies evaluating robotic-assisted reconstructive surgery of the bladder neck in adult men. Articles in non-English, author replies, editorials, pediatric-based studies, and reviews were excluded. Outcomes of interest were patency and incontinence rates, which were pooled when appropriate.

Results: After identifying 158 articles on initial search, we included only ten studies that fit all aforementioned criteria for robotic-assisted bladder neck reconstruction. All were case series published from March 2018 to March 2022 ranging from six to 32 men, with the median follow-up of 5-23 months. A total of 119 patients were included in our analysis. A variety of etiologies and surgical techniques were described. Patency rates ranged from 50% to 100%, and pooled patency was 80% (95/119). incontinence rates ranged from 0% to 33%, and pooled incontinence was 17% (8/47). Our findings were limited by small sample sizes, relatively short follow-ups, and heterogeneity between studies.

Conclusion: Despite limitations, current available evidence suggests comparable patency outcomes and improved incontinence outcomes for robotic bladder neck reconstruction compared to open repair. Additional prospective studies with longer-term follow-ups are needed to confirm these findings.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11318445PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajur.2023.08.007DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

bladder neck
28
neck reconstruction
20
robotic-assisted bladder
16
systematic review
12
patency incontinence
12
incontinence outcomes
8
open repair
8
incontinence rates
8
rates ranged
8
bladder
7

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!