↓ Skip to main content

Intraoperative T staging in radical retropubic prostatectomy: is it reliable?

Overview of attention for article published in Urology, May 2001
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

patent
12 patents

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Intraoperative T staging in radical retropubic prostatectomy: is it reliable?
Published in
Urology, May 2001
DOI 10.1016/s0090-4295(01)00904-9
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

During radical prostatectomy, wide local excision of the lateral prostatic fascia and neurovascular bundle on the ipsilateral side of the tumor is advocated if nerve sparing is likely to result in a positive surgical margin. Our intent was to validate whether intraoperative T staging can predict the presence of positive surgical margins and aid in the decision of whether to perform nerve-sparing prostatectomy. One surgeon performed 100 consecutive radical prostatectomies, and one pathologist interpreted the pathologic findings. Topographic distribution of tumor within the specimen was assessed intraoperatively by palpation. The margin status was similarly assessed. This tactile clinical impression was compared with the final pathologic findings. The surgical margins were positive in 39 (39%) of 100 cases. The intraoperative assessment of the margin status had a high false-negative rate and a sensitivity of only 7%. However, the specificity was 96%, because few margins were falsely positive. The overall accuracy was 62%, with a negative predictive value of 62%. The sensitivity of the intraoperative assessment of tumor location was 73%, and the positive predictive value was 65%. The results of our study indicate that the intraoperative assessment of the margin status is not accurate and thus cannot help determine which patients require excision of the neurovascular bundle. We believe the decision to preserve the neurovascular bundle should be based on the preoperative prognostic factors and the presence of an intact capsule covering the region of the gland adjacent to this structure.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 17%
Other 1 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 8%
Other 1 8%
Unknown 3 25%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 33%
Engineering 2 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Computer Science 1 8%
Chemistry 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 June 2025.
All research outputs
#8,535,684
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Urology
#2,940
of 7,811 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,305
of 42,349 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Urology
#15
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,811 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 42,349 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.