Yong Wei1,2, Qianying Ji1, Wenren Zuo1, Shiyan Wang1, Xinyi Wang1, Qingyi Zhu1,2. 1. Department of Urology, Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, Nanjing, China. 2. Department of Urology, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.
We would like to thank Wu et al. (1) for their comments on our research: “Efficacy and safety of single-port robotic radical prostatectomy and multiport robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis” (2).The reviewers (Wu et al.) said that we stated that after excluding the study by Moschovas et al. (3) in Fig. 8, the blood loss between the single-port robotic radical prostatectomy (SP) and multiport robotic radical prostatectomy (MP) groups changed from statistical difference (Z=2.37, P=0.02) to no statistical difference (Z=1.59, P=0.11). Our results were easily influenced by this study. According to the sensitivity analysis theory, we simply compared the I2 changes before and after the removal of Moschovas et al.’s research.Secondly, the reviewers said that we reported that there was no significant heterogeneity observed in Fig. 7 before and after the removal of Moschovas et al. (3). Moschovas et al.’ study was not the source of the heterogeneity. We attempted to identify the research that was influencing the I2 value to the greatest extent to test the sensitivity. We found that even the most obvious influencing research only slightly altered the I2 value, and the other included literature has less impact on the results than Moschovas et al.’s study. In this way, the robustness of the analysis was guaranteed.The article’s supplementary files as