PURPOSE: To assess the impact of HA on robotic PN (RPN) outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent RPN in eight centers between 2009 and 2013. Hemorrhagic complications were defined as the occurrence of a pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula or hematoma requiring transfusion. Patients were first divided into two groups: group A (use of at least one HA) and group B (no HA used), and then into five groups to assess the impact of each HA: group 1 (no HA), group 2 (Floseal(®) only), group 3 (Surgicel(®) only), group 4 (Tachosil(®) only) and group 5 (Surgicel(®) + Floseal(®)). The impact of HA was evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Out of 515 RPN, 315 (61 %) were done using at least one HA (group A) and 200 (39 %) were done without any HA (group B). Patients in both groups had similar hemorrhagic complication rates (13 % vs. 15 %, p = 0.42) and postoperative complication rates (19 % vs. 23 %, p = 0.32). In multivariate analysis, the absence of HA was not a risk factor for hemorrhagic complications (OR 0.77, p = 0.54). When each type of HA was considered individually, none was associated with the occurrence of hemorrhagic complication either in univariate or in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter study, the use of HA was not associated with a lower risk of hemorrhagic or global complications.
PURPOSE: To assess the impact of HA on robotic PN (RPN) outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent RPN in eight centers between 2009 and 2013. Hemorrhagic complications were defined as the occurrence of a pseudoaneurysm, arteriovenous fistula or hematoma requiring transfusion. Patients were first divided into two groups: group A (use of at least one HA) and group B (no HA used), and then into five groups to assess the impact of each HA: group 1 (no HA), group 2 (Floseal(®) only), group 3 (Surgicel(®) only), group 4 (Tachosil(®) only) and group 5 (Surgicel(®) + Floseal(®)). The impact of HA was evaluated by univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Out of 515 RPN, 315 (61 %) were done using at least one HA (group A) and 200 (39 %) were done without any HA (group B). Patients in both groups had similar hemorrhagic complication rates (13 % vs. 15 %, p = 0.42) and postoperative complication rates (19 % vs. 23 %, p = 0.32). In multivariate analysis, the absence of HA was not a risk factor for hemorrhagic complications (OR 0.77, p = 0.54). When each type of HA was considered individually, none was associated with the occurrence of hemorrhagic complication either in univariate or in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter study, the use of HA was not associated with a lower risk of hemorrhagic or global complications.
Authors: Hardean E Achneck; Bantayehu Sileshi; Ryan M Jamiolkowski; David M Albala; Mark L Shapiro; Jeffrey H Lawson Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Humberto Laydner; Wahib Isac; Riccardo Autorino; Ahmad Kassab; Rachid Yakoubi; Shahab Hillyer; Ali Khalifeh; Steven C Campbell; Amr Fergany; Matthew Simmons; Jihad H Kaouk Journal: Urology Date: 2013-01-04 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: Jeong Ho Kim; Yong Hyun Park; Yong June Kim; Seok Ho Kang; Seok Soo Byun; Cheol Kwak; Sung Hoo Hong Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-01-14 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Anup P Ramani; Mihir M Desai; Andrew P Steinberg; Christopher S Ng; Sidney C Abreu; Jihad H Kaouk; Antonio Finelli; Andrew C Novick; Inderbir S Gill Journal: J Urol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Inderbir S Gill; Louis R Kavoussi; Brian R Lane; Michael L Blute; Denise Babineau; J Roberto Colombo; Igor Frank; Sompol Permpongkosol; Christopher J Weight; Jihad H Kaouk; Michael W Kattan; Andrew C Novick Journal: J Urol Date: 2007-05-11 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Diego M Carrion; Sergio Alonso Y Gregorio; Juan Gómez Rivas; Alfredo Aguilera Bazán; Jesús Díez Sebastián; Luis Martínez-Piñeiro Journal: Cent European J Urol Date: 2017-10-17