MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3082808626 · doi:10.1111/andr.12898

Effect of neurovascular bundle sparing radical cystectomy on post‐operative continence and sexual function: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2020· review· en· W3082808626 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAndrology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBladder and Urothelial Cancer Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsNeurovascular bundleMedicineUrinary continenceSexual functionMeta-analysisCystectomyPotencyProspective cohort studyUrologySurgeryInternal medicineProstatectomyBladder cancerProstateCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether the neurovascular bundle (NVB) sparing could improve post-operative urinary continence and potency. Furthermore, concern remains regarding the impact of nerve-sparing (NS) radical cystectomy (RC) on oncological outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to evaluate whether in men undergoing NS RC could improve post-operative urinary continence and potency. The secondary objective was to assess whether NS RC could compromise the oncological control. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic search of the PubMed and Web of Science was performed in February 2020, yielding 1446 unique records. A total of 13 comparative cohort studies were included. Risk of bias in each study was assessed separately by two authors using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). RESULTS: Data from 921 participants in 12 studies were synthesized in the present meta-analysis. Meta-analysis revealed that NS compared with non-nerve sparing (NNS) results in improved post-operative potency, daytime continence, and nocturnal continence. RRs were 9.35 (P < .00001) in potency, 1.11 (P = .045) in daytime continence, and 1.33 (P = .002) in nocturnal continence, respectively. Furthermore, no differences were found in the included studies reporting oncological outcomes. RRs were 0.88 (P = .61) in local and/or distant recurrence between two groups. A sensitivity analysis of prospective studies indicated consistent results. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicates that NS RC can improve post-operative potency, and daytime and nocturnal urinary continence, without compromising oncological control, compared with NNS RC in men.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.951

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it