MP61-06 IMPACT OF POSTERIOR RECONSTRUCTION URETHROVESICAL ANASTOMOSIS ON 5-YEAR INCIDENCE OF UNDERGOING CONTINENCE IMPROVING PROCEDURES AFTER ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 Apr 2023MP61-06 IMPACT OF POSTERIOR RECONSTRUCTION URETHROVESICAL ANASTOMOSIS ON 5-YEAR INCIDENCE OF UNDERGOING CONTINENCE IMPROVING PROCEDURES AFTER ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL Braden Millan, Jen Hoogenes, Michael Uy, Raees Cassim, and Bobby Shayegan Braden MillanBraden Millan More articles by this author , Jen HoogenesJen Hoogenes More articles by this author , Michael UyMichael Uy More articles by this author , Raees CassimRaees Cassim More articles by this author , and Bobby ShayeganBobby Shayegan More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000003319.06AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Posterior reconstruction of the Denonvilliers’ musculofascial plate also known as the Rocco stitch, have shown mixed results on early return to urinary continence, yet little data exist on long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term need for incontinence improving procedures post robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) comparing posterior reconstruction urethrovesical anastomosis (PR-UVA) versus conventional urethrovesical anastomosis (C-UVA). METHODS: Consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer undergoing RARP were randomized to PR-UVA or C-UVA groups. Return to continence outcomes were assessed using a validated questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC] Short Form-26) at baseline, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12-month follow-up. Five-year outcomes were assessed by frequency of continence-improving procedures. RESULTS: A total of 163 patients were randomized from April 2014 to July 2015 and 140 patients completed follow-up. Pre-operative clinical and functional variables were equivalent between study arms. Using a continence definition of 0-1 pads/day, the continence rates for PR-UVA versus the C-UVA were 39% versus 38% at 2 months (p=1.0), and 93% versus 86%, respectively, at 12 months (p=0.3). Frequency of urine leak, quantity of pad use, subjective urinary control, and overall bother improved significantly in all patients during the 12-month study period (p<0.001); however, no difference was demonstrated between groups. Five-year results showed no difference in the number of patients undergoing a continence-improving procedure (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.29-2.80; p=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: PR-UVA failed to show a benefit in short-term return to urinary continence or need for an incontinence improving procedure at 5-year follow-up post RARP. Source of Funding: The Masonic Foundation of Ontario © 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 209Issue Supplement 4April 2023Page: e854 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2023 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Braden Millan More articles by this author Jen Hoogenes More articles by this author Michael Uy More articles by this author Raees Cassim More articles by this author Bobby Shayegan More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".