{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01279317697228145, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.393700787401575, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Nerve‐sparing approach during radical prostatectomy is strongly associated with the rate of postoperative urinary continence recovery

Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction are the most bothersome sequelae affecting health‐related quality of life in patients treated with radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. While it has been widely reported that a nerve‐sparing approach significantly improves postoperative erectile function, the impact of neurovascular bundle preservation on urinary continence recovery is still a matter of controversy. Our study clearly demonstrates that patients treated with nerve‐sparing radical prostatectomy have higher chances of recovering full continence after surgery. The results indicate that, when technically and oncologically feasible, an attempt at a nerve‐sparing approach should be planned in order to increase the probability of achieving full continence after radical prostatectomy.