Literature DB >> 17652279

The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy.

Andrew J Vickers1, Fernando J Bianco, Angel M Serio, James A Eastham, Deborah Schrag, Eric A Klein, Alwyn M Reuther, Michael W Kattan, J Edson Pontes, Peter T Scardino.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The learning curve for surgery--i.e., improvement in surgical outcomes with increasing surgeon experience--remains primarily a theoretical concept; actual curves based on surgical outcome data are rarely presented. We analyzed the surgical learning curve for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy.
METHODS: The study cohort included 7765 prostate cancer patients who were treated with radical prostatectomy by one of 72 surgeons at four major US academic medical centers between 1987 and 2003. For each patient, surgeon experience was coded as the total number of radical prostatectomies performed by the surgeon before the patient's operation. Multivariable survival-time regression models were used to evaluate the association between surgeon experience and prostate cancer recurrence, defined as a serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA) of more than 0.4 ng/mL followed by a subsequent higher PSA level (i.e., biochemical recurrence), with adjustment for established clinical and tumor characteristics. All P values are two-sided.
RESULTS: The learning curve for prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy was steep and did not start to plateau until a surgeon had completed approximately 250 prior operations. The predicted probabilities of recurrence at 5 years were 17.9% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 12.1% to 25.6%) for patients treated by surgeons with 10 prior operations and 10.7% (95% CI = 7.1% to 15.9%) for patients treated by surgeons with 250 prior operations (difference = 7.2%, 95% CI = 4.6% to 10.1%; P<.001). This finding was robust to sensitivity analysis; in particular, the results were unaffected if we restricted the sample to patients treated after 1995, when stage migration related to the advent of PSA screening appeared largely complete.
CONCLUSIONS: As a surgeon's experience increases, cancer control after radical prostatectomy improves, presumably because of improved surgical technique. Further research is needed to examine the specific techniques used by experienced surgeons that are associated with improved outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17652279     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djm060

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  116 in total

1.  Surgery confounds biology: the predictive value of stage-, grade- and prostate-specific antigen for recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a function of surgeon experience.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Caroline J Savage; Fernando J Bianco; Eric A Klein; Michael W Kattan; Fernando P Secin; Bertrand D Guilloneau; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 7.396

2.  How do you know if you are any good? A surgeon performance feedback system for the outcomes of radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Daniel Sjoberg; Ethan Basch; Frank Sculli; Marwan Shouery; Vincent Laudone; Karim Touijer; James Eastham; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2011-11-04       Impact factor: 20.096

3.  Prostate cancer screening: facts, statistics, and interpretation in response to the US Preventive Services Task Force Review.

Authors:  Sigrid Carlsson; Andrew J Vickers; Monique Roobol; James Eastham; Peter Scardino; Hans Lilja; Jonas Hugosson
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Cancer control and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy as markers of surgical quality: analysis of heterogeneity between surgeons at a single cancer center.

Authors:  Andrew Vickers; Caroline Savage; Fernando Bianco; John Mulhall; Jaspreet Sandhu; Bertrand Guillonneau; Angel Cronin; Peter Scardino
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-11-10       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 5.  Outcomes after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Declan G Murphy; Benjamin J Challacombe; Anthony J Costello
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2008-12-01       Impact factor: 3.285

6.  Teaching laparoscopy to residents: how can we select good candidates?

Authors:  Miguel Ramirez-Backhaus; Giles Hellawell; Mafalda Melo; Ana Covita; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.092

7.  Pathologic analysis of capsular and incisional denudation and positive margin status in the development of a robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy program.

Authors:  Stephen B Williams; D E Sutherland; H A Frazier; A Schwartz; J D Engel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2009-06-11

8.  Variations among experienced surgeons in cancer control after open radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Fernando J Bianco; Andrew J Vickers; Angel M Cronin; Eric A Klein; James A Eastham; J Edson Pontes; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 7.450

9.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: analysis of an experienced open surgeon's learning curve after 300 procedures.

Authors:  Nicolas Doumerc; Carlo Yuen; Richard Savdie; Md Bayzidur Rahman; Ruth Pe Benito; Phillip Stricker
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2010-01-22

10.  Effects of pathologic stage on the learning curve for radical prostatectomy: evidence that recurrence in organ-confined cancer is largely related to inadequate surgical technique.

Authors:  Andrew J Vickers; Fernando J Bianco; Mithat Gonen; Angel M Cronin; James A Eastham; Deborah Schrag; Eric A Klein; Alwyn M Reuther; Michael W Kattan; J Edson Pontes; Peter T Scardino
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-01-14       Impact factor: 20.096

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.