Literature DB >> 21933328

Comparison of outcomes between pure laparoscopic vs robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a study of comparative effectiveness based upon validated quality of life outcomes.

Daniel L Willis1, Mark L Gonzalgo, Michelle Brotzman, Zhaoyong Feng, Bruce Trock, Li-Ming Su.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative, oncological and functional outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) with emphasis on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) data as few studies exist. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients underwent RALP or LRP by a single, fellowship trained surgeon with a standard clinical care pathway. HRQOL data using the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite (EPIC) were collected at 0, 3, 6 and 12 months after 175 consecutive LRP and 174 RALP procedures. Urinary and sexual function outcomes were compared using two methods: (1) EPIC summary/subscale analyses described as percent return to baseline function and (2) traditional single-question analysis.
RESULTS: The two groups were statistically similar with respect to demographics, clinical stage, perioperative outcomes, stage-specific surgical margin rates, and baseline urinary and sexual function scores. There was no statistical difference in postoperative urinary function between RALP and LRP using EPIC or single-question analyses at 3, 6 and 12 months. EPIC questionnaire data showed a greater return to baseline sexual function over time (mixed model analysis) in RALP than in LRP patients who had a bilateral nerve sparing procedure (Sexual Summary Score, P= 0.005; Sexual Function and Bother Subscales, P= 0.007). Using EPIC, RALP patients receiving a bilateral nerve sparing procedure showed improved percent return to baseline potency at 3 and 6 months (P < 0.025) compared with LRP patients, but had similar outcomes at 12 months (73.7% vs 66.2%, P= 0.3). Single-question analysis suggested improved potency after RALP compared with LRP, with a greater percentage of RALP patients reporting successful sexual intercourse in the past 4 weeks (87.5% vs 66.7% at 12 months, P= 0.06).
CONCLUSIONS: When comparing surgical techniques, RALP and LRP groups showed statistically similar postoperative urinary function outcomes. RALP patients had an earlier return of sexual function when compared with LRP patients after a bilateral nerve sparing procedure.
© 2011 THE AUTHORS. BJU INTERNATIONAL © 2011 BJU INTERNATIONAL.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21933328     DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10551.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BJU Int        ISSN: 1464-4096            Impact factor:   5.588


  25 in total

1.  [Radical prostatectomy - pro robotic].

Authors:  R Gillitzer
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 0.639

2.  Quality of life after radical prostatectomy: Continuing to improve on our track record.

Authors:  Garson Chan; Stephen E Pautler
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  The end of robot-assisted laparoscopy? A critical appraisal of scientific evidence on the use of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery.

Authors:  Jeroen Heemskerk; Nicole D Bouvy; Cor G M I Baeten
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Robotic-assisted perineal versus transperitoneal radical prostatectomy: A matched-pair analysis.

Authors:  Volkan Tuğcu; Oktay Akça; Abdulmuttalip Şimşek; İsmail Yiğitbaşı; Selçuk Şahin; Mustafa Gürkan Yenice; Ali İhsan Taşçı
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-04-03

Review 5.  Comparison of perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes between standard laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xing Huang; Lei Wang; Xinmin Zheng; Xinghuan Wang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 6.  Current status of various neurovascular bundle-sparing techniques in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Anup Kumar; Sarvesh Tandon; Srinivas Samavedi; Vladimir Mouraviev; Anthony S Bates; Vipul R Patel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-06-01

7.  Health-related quality of life following radical prostatectomy: long-term outcomes.

Authors:  Andrew G Matthew; Shabbir M H Alibhai; Tal Davidson; Kristen L Currie; Haiyan Jiang; Murray Krahn; Neil E Fleshner; Robin Kalnin; Alyssa S Louis; B Joyce Davison; John Trachtenberg
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2014-03-09       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Prostatectomies for localized prostate cancer: a mixed comparison network and cumulative meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kannan Sridharan; Gowri Sivaramakrishnan
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-02-23

9.  Factors related to patient-perceived satisfaction after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy based on the expanded prostate cancer index composite survey.

Authors:  J H Kim; Y-S Ha; S J Jeong; S Kim; W-J Kim; T L Jang; I Y Kim
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2013-08-06       Impact factor: 5.554

10.  Prospective assessment of time-dependent changes in quality of life of Japanese patients with prostate cancer following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Hideaki Miyake; Akira Miyazaki; Junya Furukawa; Nobuyuki Hinata; Masato Fujisawa
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-02-17
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.