Literature DB >> 23551442

The European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) survey of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

Vincenzo Ficarra1, Peter N Wiklund, Charles Henry Rochat, Prokar Dasgupta, Benjamin J Challacombe, Prasanna Sooriakumaran, Stefan Siemer, Nazareno Suardi, Giacomo Novara, Alexandre Mottrie.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate surgeons adherence to current clinical practice, with the available evidence, for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and offer a baseline assessment to measure the impact of the Pasadena recommendations. Recently, the European Association of Urology Robotic Urology Section (ERUS) supported the Pasadena Consensus Conference on best practices in RARP. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This survey was performed in January 2012. A specific questionnaire was sent, by e-mail, to 145 robotic surgeons who were included in the mailing-list of ERUS members and working in different urological institutions. Participating surgeons were invited to answer a multiple-choice questionnaire including 24-items evaluating the main RARP surgical steps.
RESULTS: In all, 116 (79.4%) invited surgeons answered the questionnaire and accepted to participate to the ERUS survey. In all, 47 (40.5%) surgeons performed >100 RARPs; 41 (35.3%) between 50 and 100, and 28 (24.1%) <50 yearly. The transperitoneal, antegrade technique was the preferred approach. Minimising bladder neck dissection and the use of athermal dissection of the neurovascular bundles (NVBs) were also popular. There was more heterogeneity in the use of energy for seminal vesicle dissection, the preservation of the tips of the seminal vesicle and the choice between intra- and interfascial planes during the antero-lateral dissection of the NVBs. There was also large variability in the posterior and/or anterior reconstruction steps.
CONCLUSIONS: The present study is the first international survey evaluating surgeon preferences during RARP. Considering that the results were collected before the publication of the Pasadena recommendations, the data might be considered an important baseline evaluation to test the dissemination and effects of the Pasadena recommendations in subsequent years.
© 2013 BJU International.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23551442     DOI: 10.1111/bju.12100

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


  12 in total

1.  The challenge of implementing laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy.

Authors:  Jan Deprest; Ladislav Krofta; Frank Van der Aa; Alfredo L Milani; Jan Den Boon; Filip Claerhout; Jan-Paul Roovers
Journal:  Int Urogynecol J       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 2.894

2.  Current beliefs and practice patterns among urologists regarding prostate magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance-targeted biopsy.

Authors:  Akhil Muthigi; Abhinav Sidana; Arvin K George; Michael Kongnyuy; Mahir Maruf; Subin Valayil; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-10-12       Impact factor: 3.498

3.  Supra-pubic versus urethral catheter after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: systematic review of current evidence.

Authors:  Riccardo Bertolo; Andrew Tracey; Prokar Dasgupta; Bernardo Rocco; Salvatore Micali; Giampaolo Bianchi; Lance Hampton; Ash K Tewari; Francesco Porpiglia; Riccardo Autorino
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-03-29       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Cryosurgery, an alternative treatment option for organ-confined prostate cancer: current beliefs and practice patterns of urologists.

Authors:  Michael Kongnyuy; Daniel M Halpern; Kaitlin E Kosinski; Aaron E Katz
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 5.  Robotic Surgical System for Radical Prostatectomy: A Health Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2017-07-07

Review 6.  Laparoscopic simple prostatectomy versus robot-assisted simple prostatectomy for large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials.

Authors:  Kun-Peng Li; Si-Yu Chen; Li Yang
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-10-22

7.  The History of Robotics in Surgical Specialties.

Authors:  Jay Shah; Arpita Vyas; Dinesh Vyas
Journal:  Am J Robot Surg       Date:  2014-06-01

8.  Recommendations on robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a Brazilian experts' consensus.

Authors:  Eliney Ferreira Faria; Carlos Vaz Melo Maciel; André Berger; Anuar Mitre; Breno Dauster; Celso Heitor Freitas; Clovis Fraga; Daher Chade; Marcos Dall'Oglio; Francisco Carvalho; Franz Campos; Gustavo Franco Carvalhal; Gustavo Caserta Lemos; Gustavo Guimarães; Hamilton Zampolli; Joao Ricardo Alves; Joao Pádua Manzano; Marco Antônio Fortes; Marcos Flavio Holanda Rocha; Mauricio Rubinstein; Murilo Luz; Pedro Romanelli; Rafael Coelho; Raphael Rocha; Roberto Dias Machado; Rodolfo Borges Dos Reis; Stenio Zequi; Romulo Guida; Valdair Muglia; Marcos Tobias-Machado
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-01-11

9.  Transvesical robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: initial experience and surgical outcomes.

Authors:  Xiaochen Zhou; Bin Fu; Cheng Zhang; Weipeng Liu; Ju Guo; Luyao Chen; Enjun Lei; Xu Zhang; Gongxian Wang
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2020-06-01       Impact factor: 5.588

Review 10.  Laparoscopic and robotic total mesorectal excision in the treatment of rectal cancer. Brief review and personal remarks.

Authors:  Paolo Pietro Bianchi; Wanda Petz; Fabrizio Luca; Roberto Biffi; Giuseppe Spinoglio; Marco Montorsi
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2014-05-06       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.