Table 12:
GRADE Evidence Profile for Robot-Assisted Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy for Erectile Function at 3 Months
| # Studies (Design) | Risk of Bias | Inconsistency | Indirectness | Imprecision | Publication Bias | Upgrade Considerations | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 RCT | Serious limitations (−1)a | No serious limitations | No serious limitations | No serious limitations | Undetected | None | ⊕⊕⊕ Moderate |
| 11 non-RCTs | Serious limitations (−1)b | Serious limitations (−1)b | No serious limitations | Serious limitations (−1)c | Undetected | None | ⊕ Very low |
Abbreviations: GRADE, Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation; RCT, randomized controlled trial.
a
No intention-to-treat analysis. Interim 3-month data analysis.
b
Nonrandomized studies start at low GRADE. Differences in baseline patient, cancer, or surgeon characteristics between groups may impact erectile function. Some studies did not adjust for possible confounding. Even when adjusted, results were inconsistent, showing both significant and nonsignificant results.
c
Use of nonvalidated or nonstandardized assessments for dichotomous outcomes.