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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Suprapubic tube versus urethral catheter drainage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Urology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12894-017-0312-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhongyu Jian, Shijian Feng, Yuntian Chen, Xin Wei, Deyi Luo, Hong Li, Kunjie Wang |
| Abstract |
Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in the elderly population. The standard treatment is radical prostatectomy (RARP). However, urologists do not have consents on the postoperative urine drainage management (suprapubic tube (ST)/ urethral catheter (UC)). Thus, we try to compare ST drainage to UC drainage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy regarding to comfort, recovery rate and continence using the method of meta-analysis. A systematic search was performed in Dec. 2017 on PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. The authors independently reviewed the records to identify studies comparing ST with UC of patients underwent RARP. Meta-analysis was performed using the extracted data from the selected studies. Seven studies, including 3 RCTs, with a total of 946 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in our meta-analysis. Though there was no significant difference between the ST group and the UC group on postoperative pain (RR1.73, P 0.20), our study showed a significant improvement on bother or discomfort, defined as trouble in hygiene and sleep, caused by catheter when compared two groups at postoperative day (POD) 7 in ST group (RR2.05, P 0.006). There was no significant difference between the ST group and UC group on urinary continence (RR0.98, P 0.74) and emergency department visit (RR0.61, P 0.11). The rates of bladder neck contracture and other complications were very low in both groups. Compared to UC, ST showed a weak advantage. So it might be a good choice to choose ST over RARP. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 7 | 11% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 9 | 14% |
| Unknown | 21 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 25 | 40% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 10% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 3% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 11% |
| Unknown | 20 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 07 January 2018.
All research outputs
#20,458,307
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from BMC Urology
#652
of 754 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#377,939
of 441,866 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Urology
#12
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 754 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 441,866 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.