Copyright
©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Meta-Anal. Aug 26, 2014; 2(3): 107-126
Published online Aug 26, 2014. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v2.i3.107
Published online Aug 26, 2014. doi: 10.13105/wjma.v2.i3.107
Table 12 Meta-regression of 12-mo potency recovery
Techniques | Factors | Sample, n | Coefficient | P value | 95%CI | |
Lower CI | Upper CI | |||||
LRP vs RRP | Age | 8 | -0.0334222 | 0.682 | -0.156947 | 0.2237914 |
Gleason Score | 5 | -0.0059256 | 0.732 | -0.5614423 | 0.4429304 | |
PSA | 5 | 0.0509797 | 0.558 | -0.1961242 | 0.2980837 | |
RARP vs RRP | Age | 6 | -0.006352 | 0.939 | -0.2221039 | 0.2093999 |
PSA | 5 | 0.0018209 | 0.892 | -0.0373331 | 0.0409749 | |
RARP vs LRP | Age | 6 | -0.0437647 | 0.535 | -0.2229024 | 0.1353731 |
BMI | 5 | 0.1340739 | 0.315 | -0.220684 | 0.4888318 | |
Prostate Volume | 4 | -0.0080152 | 0.894 | -0.2365214 | 0.2204911 | |
PSA | 6 | 0.0350044 | 0.588 | -0.1301063 | 0.2001150 |
- Citation: Shi MJ, Yang J, Meng XY, Li S, Liu T, Fang ZH, Cao R, Wang XH. Comparison of functional outcomes after retropubic, laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis. World J Meta-Anal 2014; 2(3): 107-126
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2308-3840/full/v2/i3/107.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.13105/wjma.v2.i3.107