Literature DB >> 26860793

Comparison of Perioperative and Early Oncologic Outcomes between Open and Robotic Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy in a Contemporary Population Based Cohort.

Shane M Pearce1, Joseph J Pariser2, Theodore Karrison3, Sanjay G Patel2, Scott E Eggener2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We compared rates of positive surgical margins, use of postoperative radiation therapy, and perioperative outcomes between robotic assisted laparoscopic and open radical prostatectomy in a contemporary population based cohort.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the National Cancer Data Base from 2010 through 2011 patients who underwent robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (73,131) and open radical prostatectomy (23,804) for nonmetastatic prostate adenocarcinoma were identified. Covariates included age, race, Charlson comorbidity index, prostate specific antigen, biopsy Gleason score, clinical stage, final Gleason score, pathological T stage, lymph node dissection, nodal status, facility type, hospital volume and year of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with positive surgical margins, use of adjuvant/salvage radiation therapy, prolonged length of stay, readmission and 30-day mortality. Outcomes were also compared in 1:1 propensity matched cohorts.
RESULTS: Analysis of propensity matched cohorts showed robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy reduced the risk of positive surgical margins (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.83-0.93, p <0.01), the use of radiation therapy (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.63-0.80, p <0.01) and 30-day mortality (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.13-0.60, p <0.01). The protective effect of robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for positive surgical margins was found in patients with pT2 disease only (pT2-OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.79-0.91, p <0.01; pT3-OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.86-1.04, p=0.2). Similar results were obtained using multivariable regression.
CONCLUSIONS: In a contemporary large national cohort, robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy was independently associated with clinically meaningful reductions in positive surgical margins, postoperative radiation therapy and 30-day mortality compared to open radical prostatectomy. The oncologic benefit was primarily in patients with organ confined disease. Limitations were those associated with any observational study, namely the potential for bias due to unmeasured confounders.
Copyright © 2016 American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  mortality; prostatectomy; prostatic neoplasms; robotics; treatment outcome

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26860793     DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2016.01.105

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Urol        ISSN: 0022-5347            Impact factor:   7.450


  21 in total

1.  Improving access to surgical innovation in the community: Implementation of shared access model in Canadian healthcare.

Authors:  Mitchell G Goldenberg; Brent Kerbel; Rajiv K Singal
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 2.  Reservoir Placement Considerations During Inflatable Penile Prosthesis Surgery.

Authors:  Steven J Hudak
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2019-01-28       Impact factor: 3.092

Review 3.  Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?

Authors:  Abbas Basiri; Jean Jmch de la Rosette; Shahin Tabatabaei; Henry H Woo; M Pilar Laguna; Hamidreza Shemshaki
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2018-01-23       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Surgical method influences specimen margins and biochemical recurrence during radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Victor Srougi; Jose Bessa; Mohammed Baghdadi; Igor Nunes-Silva; Jose Batista da Costa; Silvia Garcia-Barreras; Eric Barret; Francois Rozet; Marc Galiano; Rafael Sanchez-Salas; Xavier Cathelineau
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Functional outcomes of clinically high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional analysis.

Authors:  F Abdollah; D Dalela; A Sood; J Sammon; R Cho; L Nocera; M Diaz; W Jeong; J O Peabody; N Fossati; G Gandaglia; A Briganti; F Montorsi; M Menon
Journal:  Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis       Date:  2017-05-02       Impact factor: 5.554

Review 6.  Robotic Surgical System for Radical Prostatectomy: A Health Technology Assessment.

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

7.  Next-generation prostate cancer risk calculator for primary care physicians.

Authors:  Robert K Nam; Raj Satkunavisam; Joseph L Chin; Jonathan Izawa; John Trachtenberg; Ricardo Rendon; David Bell; Rajiv Singal; Christopher Sherman; Linda Sugar; Kevin Chagin; Michael W Kattan
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 8.  Comparative effectiveness of robotic and open radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Rodrigo Rodrigues Pessoa; Paul Maroni; Janet Kukreja; Simon P Kim
Journal:  Transl Androl Urol       Date:  2021-05

9.  Analgesic efficacy of intrathecal morphine and bupivacaine during the early postoperative period in patients who underwent robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a prospective randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Jung-Woo Shim; Yun Jeong Cho; Hyong Woo Moon; Jaesik Park; Hyung Mook Lee; Yong-Suk Kim; Young Eun Moon; Sang Hyun Hong; Min Suk Chae
Journal:  BMC Urol       Date:  2021-02-26       Impact factor: 2.264

10.  Will It Play in Peoria? A Pilot Study of a Robotic Skills Curriculum for Surgical Oncology Fellows.

Authors:  Sarwat B Ahmad; MaryJoe Rice; Cecilia Chang; Ahmad Hamad; T Peter Kingham; Jin He; Jose M Pimiento; Amer H Zureikat; Herbert J Zeh; Melissa E Hogg
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-03-31       Impact factor: 4.339

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.