首页> 外文期刊>The journal of sexual medicine >Erectile function recovery rate after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis.
【24h】

Erectile function recovery rate after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis.

机译:前列腺癌根治术后勃起功能恢复率的荟萃分析。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

INTRODUCTION: Erectile function recovery (EFR) rates after radical prostatectomy (RP) vary greatly based on a number of factors, such as erectile dysfunction (ED) definition, data acquisition means, time-point postsurgery, and population studied. AIM: To conduct a meta-analysis of carefully selected reports from the available literature to define the EFR rate post-RP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: EFR rate after RP. METHODS: An EMBASE and MEDLINE search was conducted for the time range 1985-2007. Articles were assessed blindly by strict inclusion criteria: report of EFR data post-RP, study population >or=50 patients, >or=1 year follow-up, nerve-sparing status declared, no presurgery ED, and no other prostate cancer therapy. Meta-analysis was conducted to determine the EFR rate and relative risks (RR) for dichotomous subgroups. RESULTS: A total of 212 relevant studies were identified; only 22 (10%) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed (9,965 RPs, EFR data: 4,983 subjects). Mean study population size: 226.5, standard deviation = 384.1 (range: 17-1,834). Overall EFR rate was 58%. Single center series publications (k = 19) reported a higher EFR rate compared with multicenter series publications (k = 3): 60% vs. 33%, RR = 1.82, P = 0.001. Studies reporting >or=18-month follow-up (k = 10) reported higher EFR rate vs. studies with <18-month follow-up (k = 12), 60% vs. 56%, RR = 1.07, P = 0.02. Open RP (k = 16) and laparoscopic RP (k = 4) had similar EFR (57% vs. 58%), while robot-assisted RP resulted in a higher EFR rate (k = 2), 73% compared with these other approaches, P = 0.001. Patients <60 years old had a higher EFR rate vs. patients >or=60 years, 77% vs. 61%, RR = 1.26, P = 0.001. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that most of the published literature does not meet strict criteria for reporting post-RP EFR. Single and multiple surgeon series have comparable EFR rates, but single center studies have a higher EFR. Younger men have higher EFR and no significant difference in EFR between ORP and LRP is evident.
机译:简介:根治性前列腺切除术(RP)后的勃起功能恢复(EFR)率因许多因素而有很大差异,例如勃起功能障碍(ED)的定义,数据获取方式,手术后的时间点和研究的人群。目的:对现有文献中精心选择的报告进行荟萃分析,以定义RP后的EFR率。主要观察指标:RP后的EFR率。方法:在1985-2007年的时间范围内进行了EMBASE和MEDLINE搜索。根据严格的纳入标准对文章进行盲目评估:RP后的EFR数据报告,研究人群>或= 50例患者,>或= 1年的随访,宣布神经保留状态,无术前ED和无其他前列腺癌治疗。进行荟萃分析以确定二分亚组的EFR率和相对风险(RR)。结果:共鉴定到212项相关研究。只有22个(10%)符合纳入标准并进行了分析(9,965 RPs,EFR数据:4,983名受试者)。平均研究人群规模:226.5,标准差= 384.1(范围:17-1,834)。总EFR率为58%。与多中心系列出版物(k = 3)相比,单中心系列出版物(k = 19)报告的EFR率更高:60%比33%,RR = 1.82,P = 0.001。报告≥18个月随访(k = 10)的研究报告的EFR率高于<18个月随访(k = 12)的研究,分别为60%和56%,RR = 1.07,P = 0.02。开放式RP(k = 16)和腹腔镜RP(k = 4)具有相似的EFR(57%vs. 58%),而机器人辅助RP导致较高的EFR率(k = 2),与其他方法相比为73%接近,P = 0.001。与60岁以上的患者相比,<60岁的患者的EFR率更高,分别为77%和61%,RR = 1.26,P = 0.001。结论:这些数据表明大多数已发表的文献不符合报告RP后EFR的严格标准。单人和多名外科医生系列的EFR率相当,但单中心研究的EFR更高。年轻男性的EFR较高,ORP和LRP之间的EFR没有明显差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号