| Literature DB >> 24171923 |
Takehiro Sejima1, Toshihiko Masago, Shuichi Morizane, Katsuya Hikita, Naoto Kobayashi, Akihisa Yao, Kuniyasu Muraoka, Masashi Honda, Hiroya Kitano, Atsushi Takenaka.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although a very small number of Japanese hospitals had been performing robotic surgery before 2011, the number now using it is increasing rapidly due to the application of health insurance to robotic surgery for prostate cancer (PCa) since April, 2012. We report our initial experience of treating 100 patients by robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) with a focus on constitutional introduction and implementation based on minimal invasive surgery center (MISC) and patient outcomes.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24171923 PMCID: PMC3874742 DOI: 10.1186/1756-0500-6-436
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Res Notes ISSN: 1756-0500
Figure 1The termination order (English version) for RARP and low anterior resection are shown. The original documents are described in Japanese.
Figure 2The inside views and equipment of the MISC robotic-operating theater are shown. A) The floor space is 98 m2. B) This theater has six fixed monitors and one movable monitor. The six fixed monitors include two sets of 70 inch and four sets of 32 inch-sized monitors. One movable monitor is 46 inch in size. Four sets of 32 inch size fixed monitors and one movable monitor are capable of 3D display.
Actual results of whole robotic surgeries in MISC
| •Urology | *RARP | 100 | Medical insurance | 0 |
| *Partial nephrectomy | 12 | Private expense | 0 | |
| •Gynecology | *Hysterectomy | 20 | Institutional fund | 0 |
| •Respiratory surgery | *Lobectomy | 18 | Private expense | 0 |
| *Thymectomy | 14 | Private expense | 0 | |
| *Posterior mediastinal tumor resection | 1 | Institutional fund | 0 | |
| •Digestive surgery | *Gastrectomy | 15 | Institutional fund | 1 |
| *Low anterior resection | 8 | Institutional fund | 0 | |
| Total | 188 | 1 |
Pre-operative patients’ characteristics
| Continuous variables; mean (range) | |
| Age (ys) | 64.6 (48 – 76) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 23.8 (18.0 – 35.4) |
| PSA (ng/ml) | 9.5 (2.7 – 39.2) |
| No. clinical stage: | |
| T1c | 27 |
| T2a | 38 |
| T2b | 6 |
| T2c | 20 |
| T3a | 9 |
| No. Gleason score: | |
| 6 | 27 |
| 7 | 38 |
| 8 | 23 |
| 9 | 11 |
| 10 | 1 |
| No. IPSS: | |
| 0 – 7 | 53 |
| 8 – 19 | 34 |
| 20 - 35 | 13 |
Post-operative pathology
| No. pathological stage: | |
| T2a | 15 |
| T2b | 5 |
| T2c | 55 |
| T3a | 21 |
| T3b | 4 |
| No. Gleason score: | |
| 6 | 11 |
| 7 | 64 |
| 8 | 13 |
| 9 | 12 |
| No. Positive lymph nodes | 5 |
| No. PSM by stage (%): | |
| pT2 | 8/75 (10.7%) |
| pT3a | 9/21 (42.9%) |
| pT3b | 2/4 (50%) |
| All stage | 19/100 (19%) |
| No. PSM location | |
| Apical | 14 |
| Lateral | 1 |
| Posterior | 1 |
| Anterior | 1 |
| Multifocal | 2 |
Figure 3The sequential transitions of pre- and post-operative IPSS were shown. A) Total cases, and B) Patients divided into two groups according to the severity of pre-operative IPSS; Moderate to severe group, 8–35 points; Mild group, 0–7 points.
Figure 4The post-operative continence recovery rates at precise time points are shown.
Figure 5The sequential transitions of pre- and post-operative IIEF-EF domain scores in patients with no and mild erectile dysfunction before surgery are shown. A) Total cases, and B) Patients divided into three groups according to the status of neurovascular sparing procedures.