Literature DB >> 15947662

Robotic radical prostatectomy in the community setting--the learning curve and beyond: initial 200 cases.

Vipul R Patel1, A S Tully, R Holmes, J Lindsay.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The introduction of robotic assistance has the potential to improve surgical outcomes and reduce the steep learning curve associated with conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. We report on our experience with robotic radical prostatectomy in the community setting.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 200 patients underwent robotic radical prostatectomy during 18 months. Prospective data collection included a quality of life (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) questionnaire, basic demographics, prostate specific antigen (PSA), clinical stage and Gleason grade. Operative outcome measures included operative time, estimated blood loss and complications. Postoperative outcome measures included hospital stay, catheter time, pathology, PSA and return of continence.
RESULTS: Average operative time was 141 minutes with an estimated blood loss of 75 cc. The intraoperative complication rate was 1% with no mortality, reexploration or transfusion. Of the patients 95% were discharged home on postoperative day 1 (1 to 3) with hematocrit averaging 34.5 (range 25 to 45). The average difference in preoperative and postoperative hematocrit was 3 points (range -2 to 15). Average catheter time was 7.2 days (range 5 to 15). The positive margin rate was 10.5% for the entire series, 5.7% for T2 tumors, 28.5% (T3a), 20% (T3b) and 33% (T4a). Of the patients 95% had undetectable PSA (less than 0.1 ng/ml) at average followup of 9.7 months. Continence at 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months was 47%, 78%, 89%, 92% and 98%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Our initial experience with robotic radical prostatectomy is promising. The learning curve was approximately 20 to 25 cases. With a structured methodical approach we were able to implement robotics safely and effectively into our community practice with minimal patient morbidity, and good oncological and functional outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15947662     DOI: 10.1097/01.ju.0000162082.12962.40

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  95 in total

1.  [Pyeloplasty - pro robotic-assisted].

Authors:  Z Akçetin; S Siemer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Residency training program paradigms for teaching robotic surgical skills to urology residents.

Authors:  Sonal Grover; Gerald Y Tan; Abhishek Srivastava; Robert A Leung; Ashutosh K Tewari
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  Safety of selective nerve sparing in high risk prostate cancer during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Anup Kumar; Srinivas Samavedi; Anthony S Bates; Vladimir Mouraviev; Rafael F Coelho; Bernardo Rocco; Vipul R Patel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-07-19

Review 4.  The Role of Robotics in the Invasive Management of Bladder Cancer.

Authors:  Pramit Khetrapal; Wei Shen Tan; Benjamin Lamb; Melanie Tan; Hilary Baker; James Thompson; Ashwin Sridhar; John D Kelly; Tim Briggs
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 5.  Training and outcome monitoring in robotic urologic surgery.

Authors:  Daniel Liberman; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Claudio Jeldres; Luc Valiquette; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2011-11-08       Impact factor: 14.432

Review 6.  Critical comparison of laparoscopic, robotic, and open radical prostatectomy: techniques, outcomes, and cost.

Authors:  Matthew T Gettman; Michael L Blute
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Robotic radical prostatectomy: evolution from conventional to VIP.

Authors:  Sanjeev Kaul; Mani Menon
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2006-05-19       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  Oncological and functional results of open, robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: does surgical approach and surgical experience matter?

Authors:  T R Herrmann; R Rabenalt; J U Stolzenburg; E N Liatsikos; F Imkamp; H Tezval; A J Gross; U Jonas; M Burchardt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 9.  Robot-assisted prostatectomy: the new standard of care.

Authors:  Gencay Hatiboglu; Dogu Teber; Markus Hohenfellner
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2011-02-02       Impact factor: 3.445

10.  Is the transition from open to robotic prostatectomy fair to your patients? A single-surgeon comparison with 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  Robert B Nadler; Jessica T Casey; Lee C Zhao; Neema Navai; Zachary L Smith; Ali Zhumkhawala; Amanda M Macejko
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-11-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.