Literature DB >> 22260740

Developing a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy service: defining the learning curve.

Nikhil Vasdev1, Antoine Kass-Iliyya, Ameet Patel, Geoff Bedford, Anna O'Riordon, Mark I Johnson, Garrett C Durkan, Naeem A Soomro.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) is an established treatment for patients with prostate cancer in selected centers with appropriate expertise. We studied our single-center experience of developing a LRP service and subsequent training of two additional surgeons by the initial surgeon. We assessed the learning curve of the three surgeons with regard to perioperative outcomes and oncologic results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred consecutive patients underwent a LRP between January 2005 and April 2011. Patients were divided into three equal groups (1-100 group 1], 101-200 [group 2], and 201-300 [group 3]). Age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, preoperative comorbidities, and indications for LRP were comparable for all three patient groups. Perioperative and oncologic outcomes were compared across all three groups to assess the impact of the learning curve for LRP. All surgical complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo system (CDS).
RESULTS: The mean age was 61.9 years (range 46-74 y). There was a significant reduction in the mean operative time (P<0.05), mean blood loss (P<0.05), mean duration of hospital stay (P<0.05), and duration of catherization (P<0.05) between the three groups as the series progressed. The two most important factors predictive of positive surgical margins at LRP were the initial prostate-specific antigen level and tumor stage at diagnosis. The overall positive margin rate was 27.7%. For pT(2) tumors, the positive margin rate was 21%, while patients with pT(3) tumors had a positive margin of 44%. For pT(2) tumors, positive margin rates decreased with increasing experience (group 1, 27% vs group 2, 17% vs group 3, 19%). The incidence of major complications--ie, grade CDS score ≤ III--was 4.6% (14/300).
CONCLUSION: LRP is a safe procedure with low morbidity. As surgeons progress through the learning curve, perioperative parameters and oncologic outcomes improve. Using a carefully mentored approach, LRP can be safely introduced as a new procedure without compromising patient outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22260740     DOI: 10.1089/end.2011.0635

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  4 in total

1.  Analysis of the pentafecta learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  D W Good; G D Stewart; J U Stolzenburg; S A McNeill
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2013-12-11       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Impact of a learning curve model in kidney transplantation on functional outcome and surgical complications in a small volume centre: does size really matter?

Authors:  Guido Fechner; Ilja Seifert; Stefan Hauser; Stefan C Müller
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2012-07-26       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 3.  Learning curves in laparoscopic and robot-assisted prostate surgery: a systematic search and review.

Authors:  Nikolaos Grivas; Ioannis Zachos; Georgios Georgiadis; Markos Karavitakis; Vasilis Tzortzis; Charalampos Mamoulakis
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-09-04       Impact factor: 3.661

4.  Developing a robotic prostatectomy service and a robotic fellowship programme - defining the learning curve.

Authors:  Nikhil Vasdev; Conrad Bishop; Atoine Kass-Iliyya; Sami Hamid; Thomas A McNicholas; Venkat Prasad; Gowrie Mohan-S; Timothy Lane; Gregory Boustead; James M Adshead
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2014-02-10
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.