Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Suprapubic versus urethral catheter drainage in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: advancing systematic review quality

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
World Journal of Urology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

The Original Article was published on 29 March 2018

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Bertolo R, Tracey A, Dasgupta P, Rocco B, Micali S, Bianchi G et al (2018) Supra-pubic versus urethral catheter after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: systematic review of current evidence. World J Urol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2275-x

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Clark HD, Wells GA, Huet C, McAlister FA, Salmi LR, Fergusson D et al (1999) Assessing the quality of randomized trials: reliability of the Jadad scale. Control Clin Trials 20(5):448–452

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R, Sowden AJ, Sakarovitch C, Song F et al (2003) Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 7(27):1–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Prasad SM, Large MC, Patel AR et al (2014) Early removal of urethral catheter with suprapubic tube drainage versus urethral catheter drainage alone after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 192(1):89–95

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ (2011) Chapter 7: Selecting studies and collecting data. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (ed), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. www.handbook.cochrane.org. Accessed Mar 2011

  7. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Vist GE, Falck-Ytter Y, Schünemann HJ et al (2008) What is “quality of evidence” and why is it important to clinicians? BMJ 336(7651):995–998

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Yang CJ, Ou YC, Yang CK (2015) Percutaneous cystostomy drainage for early removing urethral catheter in robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: improving on patients’ discomfort. Urol Sci 26:240–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J, Alonso-Coello P, Rind D et al (2011) GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence–imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol 64:1283–1293

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Martinschek A, Pfalzgraf D, Rafail B, Ritter M, Heinrich E, Trojan L (2016) Transurethral versus suprapubic catheter at robotassisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective randomized trial with 1-year follow-up. World J Urol 34(3):407–411

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Republic of Korea

    Eu Chang Hwang

  2. Urology Section Minneapolis Veterans Healthcare System and Department of Urology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 55417, USA

    Eu Chang Hwang, Michael C. Risk & Philipp Dahm

Authors
  1. Eu Chang Hwang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael C. Risk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Philipp Dahm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

HEC: data collection and management, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing. RM: manuscript writing/editing. DP: project development, data collection and management, data analysis, and manuscript writing/editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philipp Dahm.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Hwang EC: None; Risk MC: None; Dahm P: None.

Ethical standard

This study was carried out in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975, as revised in 2008.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hwang, E.C., Risk, M.C. & Dahm, P. Suprapubic versus urethral catheter drainage in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: advancing systematic review quality. World J Urol 36, 1501–1502 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2372-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2372-x

Search

Navigation