ObjectiveThis meta-analysis was to investigate the effects of neoadjuvant chemohormonal therapy (NCHT) on patients with prostate cancer (PCa) before radical prostatectomy (RP) and attempt to provide meaningful evidence.MethodsA systematic search was performed using the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases in February 2022 based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. The relevant studies were critically screened and we extracted the data of demography, postoperative pathology, and survival to calculate the pooled effect sizes. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were used to explore the source of heterogeneity.ResultsSix identified studies involving 1717 subjects were included according to the selection criteria. There was no significant difference between NCHT plus RP and RP alone groups regarding lymph node involvement (risk ratio [RR]=1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57-1.87, P=0.92). However, NCHT prior to RP significantly decreased the rates of positive surgical margin (PSM, RR=0.35, 95% CI: 0.22-0.55, P<0.0001) and seminal vesicle invasion (SVI, RR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.65-0.95, P=0.01), and increase pathological downstaging (RR=1.64, 95% CI: 1.17-2.29, P=0.004). Additionally, biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly prolonged under the administration of NCHT (HR=0.54, 95% CI: 0.34-0.85, P=0.008 and HR=0.67, 95% CI: 0.48-0.94, P=0.02, respectively).ConclusionsCompared to the RP alone group, patients with NCHT plus RP showed significant improvements in PSM, SVI, pathological downstaging, BRFS, and OS, whereas further multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to consolidate this concept.

Background: Peripheral electrical nerve stimulation is a routinely recommended treatment for non-neurogenic overactive bladder but has not been approved for patients with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (NLUTD). This systematic review and meta-analysis was to elucidate the efficacy and safety of electrostimulation and thus provide firm evidence for treating NLUTD. Materials and methods: We systematically performed the literature search through PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases in March 2022. The eligible studies were identified across the inclusion criteria and the data on urodynamic outcomes, voiding diary parameters, and safety was collected to quantitatively synthesize the pooled mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. Subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses were subsequently used to investigate the possible heterogeneity. This report was achieved in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses statement. Results: A total of 10 studies involving 464 subjects and 8 studies with 400 patients were included for systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. The pooled effect estimates indicated that electrostimulation could significantly improve urodynamic outcomes, including maximum cystometric capacity (MD=55.72, 95% CI 15.73, 95.72), maximum flow rate (MD=4.71, 95% CI 1.78, 7.65), maximal detrusor pressure (MD=−10.59, 95% CI −11.45, −9.73), voided volume (MD=58.14, 95% CI 42.97, 73.31), and post-void residual (MD=−32.46, 95% CI −46.63, −18.29); for voiding diary parameters, patients undergoing electrostimulation showed lower MDs of incontinence episodes per 24 h (MD=−2.45, 95% CI −4.69, −0.20) and overactive bladder symptom score (MD=−4.46, 95% CI −6.00, −2.91). In addition to surface redness and swelling, no stimulation-related severe adverse events were reported else. Conclusions: The current evidence demonstrated that peripheral electrical nerve stimulation might be effective and safe for managing NLUTD, whereas more reliable data from large-scale randomized controlled trials are necessary to strengthen this concept.