Literature DB >> 26085867

Extended pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Impact of surgical volume on efficacy and complications in a single-surgeon series.

Giovanni Battista Di Pierro1, Pietro Grande2, Johann Gregory Wirth3, Hansjörg Danuser1, Agostino Mattei1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: We assessed the impact of surgical volume on perioperative outcomes and complications of robotic extended pelvic lymph node dissection (ePLND).
METHODS: From November 2008 to October 2012, a total of 233 consecutive patients with intermediate- or high-risk clinically localized prostate cancer underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and ePLND by a single, experienced open and laparoscopic surgeon. Data were prospectively collected. Complications were classified according to the Modified Clavien System. Complications potentially related to ePLND were documented. The minimum follow-up was 3 months. To evaluate the impact of surgical volume on the results, 4 patient subgroups (subgroup 1: cases 1-59; 2: 60-117; 3: 118-175; 4: 176-233) were compared using the Chi-squared and Kruskal-Wallis tests.
RESULTS: The mean (range) operative time for ePLND was 79 minutes (range: 48-144), with a steady performance over time (p = 0.784). The count of resected lymph nodes plateaued after 60 procedures (mean [range]: 13 [range: 6-32], 15 [range: 7-34], 17 [range: 8-41], 16 [range: 8-42] in Groups 1 to 4, respectively, p = 0.001). Tumour lymph node involvement was 12% in Groups 1 and 2, 7% in Group 3 and 9% in Group 4 (p = 0.075). Overall, 115 complications were reported in 98/233 patients (42%), with a significant decrease after 175 cases (p = 0.028). In Group 4, 3 patients reported an ePLND-related bleeding requiring open revision. Lymphoceles were detected in 10/233 patients (4.2%) and 1 patient (1.7%) in each of the Groups 2 to 4 required a percutaneous drainage.
CONCLUSIONS: A surgeon with extensive experience is expected to achieve a safe learning curve for ePLND during RARP. A learning curve of 60 cases is suggested for optimal lymph node yield.

Entities:  

Year:  2015        PMID: 26085867      PMCID: PMC4455618          DOI: 10.5489/cuaj.2485

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J        ISSN: 1911-6470            Impact factor:   1.862


  23 in total

1.  Impact of separate versus en bloc pelvic lymph node dissection on the number of lymph nodes retrieved in cystectomy specimens.

Authors:  B H Bochner; H W Herr; V E Reuter
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Standard lymph node dissection for bladder cancer: significant variability in the number of reported lymph nodes.

Authors:  R P Meijer; R P P Meijer; C J M Nunnink; A E Wassenaar; A Bex; H G van der Poel; B W van Rhijn; W Meinhardt; S Horenblas
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2011-12-15       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Positioning injury, rhabdomyolysis, and serum creatine kinase-concentration course in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection.

Authors:  Agostino Mattei; Giovanni Battista Di Pierro; Verena Rafeld; Christoph Konrad; Jonas Beutler; Hansjörg Danuser
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 2.942

4.  Impact of a single-surgeon learning curve on complications, positioning injuries, and renal function in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection.

Authors:  Giovanni Battista Di Pierro; Johann Gregory Wirth; Matteo Ferrari; Hansjörg Danuser; Agostino Mattei
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2014-10-24       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  Extended pelvic lymph node dissection in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical technique and initial experience.

Authors:  David S Yee; Darren J Katz; Guilherme Godoy; Lucas Nogueira; Kian Tai Chong; Matthew Kaag; Jonathan A Coleman
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2010-02-16       Impact factor: 2.649

6.  Standardized comparison of robot-assisted limited and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Bertram E Yuh; Nora H Ruel; Rosa Mejia; Giacomo Novara; Timothy G Wilson
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-01-25       Impact factor: 5.588

7.  Extended vs standard lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for intermediate- or high-risk prostate cancer: a propensity-score-matching analysis.

Authors:  Kwang Hyun Kim; Sey Kiat Lim; Ha Yan Kim; Tae-Young Shin; Joo Yong Lee; Young Deuk Choi; Byung Ha Chung; Sung Joon Hong; Koon Ho Rha
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 5.588

8.  Prognostic factors and survival in node-positive (N1) prostate cancer-a prospective study based on data from a Swedish population-based cohort.

Authors:  Gunnar Aus; Kerstin Nordenskjöld; David Robinson; Johan Rosell; Eberhard Varenhorst
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Impact of surgical volume on the rate of lymph node metastases in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection for clinically localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Alberto Briganti; Umberto Capitanio; Felix K-H Chun; Andrea Gallina; Nazareno Suardi; Andrea Salonia; Luigi F Da Pozzo; Renzo Colombo; Valerio Di Girolamo; Roberto Bertini; Giorgio Guazzoni; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Francesco Montorsi; Patrizio Rigatti
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 10.  The role of radical prostatectomy and lymph node dissection in lymph node-positive prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Georgios Gakis; Stephen A Boorjian; Alberto Briganti; Steven Joniau; Guram Karazanashvili; R Jeffrey Karnes; Agostino Mattei; Shahrokh F Shariat; Arnulf Stenzl; Manfred Wirth; Christian G Stief
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2013-05-22       Impact factor: 20.096

View more
  6 in total

1.  Extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in prostate cancer: Practice makes perfect.

Authors:  Axel Heidenreich; David Pfister
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.862

2.  Suboptimal use of pelvic lymph node dissection: Differences in guideline adherence between robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jonas Schiffmann; Alessandro Larcher; Maxine Sun; Zhe Tian; Jérémie Berdugo; Ion Leva; Hugues Widmer; Jean-Baptiste Lattouf; Kevin C Zorn; Shahrokh F Shariat; Francesco Montorsi; Markus Graefen; Fred Saad; Pierre I Karakiewicz
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Biochemical Recurrence Prediction in High-Risk Prostate Cancer Patients, Following Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Noriya Yamaguchi; Tetsuya Yumioka; Hideto Iwamoto; Toshihiko Masago; Shuichi Morizane; Masashi Honda; Takehiro Sejima; Atsushi Takenaka
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2016-12-26       Impact factor: 1.641

Review 4.  Complications of Minimally Invasive Surgery and Their Management.

Authors:  Joshua R Kaplan; Ziho Lee; Daniel D Eun; Adam C Reese
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 5.  Learning Curves for Robotic Surgery: a Review of the Recent Literature.

Authors:  Giorgio Mazzon; Ashwin Sridhar; Gerald Busuttil; James Thompson; Senthil Nathan; Tim Briggs; John Kelly; Greg Shaw
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2017-09-23       Impact factor: 3.092

6.  External Validation of the Briganti Nomogram to Predict Lymph Node Invasion in Prostate Cancer-Setting a New Threshold Value.

Authors:  Bartosz Małkiewicz; Kuba Ptaszkowski; Klaudia Knecht; Adam Gurwin; Karol Wilk; Paweł Kiełb; Krzysztof Dudek; Romuald Zdrojowy
Journal:  Life (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-25
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.