Literature DB >> 27032296

Outpatient Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: Matched-Pair Comparison with Inpatient Surgery.

Andre K Berger1, Sameer Chopra1, Mihir M Desai1, Monish Aron1, Inderbir S Gill1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate our initial experience with outpatient robotic radical prostatectomy (RRP) and to prospectively compare outcomes with an inpatient RRP group.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective study on 30 carefully selected, motivated patients consenting for outpatient RRP (2011-2013). Inclusion criteria comprised age<65 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists score<3, body mass index<35 kg/m2, localized prostate cancer, and primary treatment. Postoperatively, close monitoring was conducted by telephone for the first 24 hours, with routine follow-up subsequently. This outpatient group was prospectively matched 1:1 with a concurrent inpatient RRP group who satisfied inclusion criteria for, but did not undergo, outpatient RRP. Validated questionnaires were administered prospectively to determine patient satisfaction and functional outcomes.
RESULTS: All outpatient RRP procedures were performed effectively. Twenty-six patients (87%) were discharged the same day of surgery, four stayed overnight for various reasons. On comparing outpatient and inpatient groups, there were no significant demographic or perioperative differences, except for shorter hospital stay (14 hours vs 44 hours, p<0.01). In both groups, 92% of patients were completely continent (no pads) at 2 months follow-up. Time to complete continence in the outpatient and inpatient groups was 32 days vs 43 days (p=0.09). Validated questionnaires revealed both groups were comparable as regards patient/family satisfaction, days of narcotic usage, days to return to work, and days to feeling 100% recovered.
CONCLUSION: Our initial experience with outpatient RRP is promising. Outpatient RRP is associated with excellent patient satisfaction and functional outcomes comparable with inpatient RRP. Patient motivation and preoperative counseling are vital for success.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27032296     DOI: 10.1089/end.2016.0135

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endourol        ISSN: 0892-7790            Impact factor:   2.942


  5 in total

1.  Work after prostate cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Vanette McLennan; Dominika Ludvik; Suzanne Chambers; Mark Frydenberg
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2019-03-21       Impact factor: 4.442

2.  Does type of robotic platform make a difference in the final cost of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy?

Authors:  Marcio Covas Moschovas; Talia Helman; Seetharam Bhat; Marco Sandri; Travis Rogers; Jonathan Noel; Sunil Reddy; Cathy Corder; Vipul Patel
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-01-28

3.  [Potential of inpatient cases of a university hospital for orthopedics and trauma surgery for outpatient care].

Authors:  Jeanette Henkelmann; Ralf Henkelmann; Nikolaus von Dercks
Journal:  Unfallchirurgie (Heidelb)       Date:  2021-08-31

4.  Same Day Discharge versus Inpatient Surgery for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Study.

Authors:  Razvan George Rahota; Ambroise Salin; Jean Romain Gautier; Christophe Almeras; Guillaume Loison; Christophe Tollon; Jean Baptiste Beauval; Guillaume Ploussard
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-02-09       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 5.  Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Advancements in surgical technique and perioperative care.

Authors:  Isaac Palma-Zamora; Firas Abdollah; Craig Rogers; Wooju Jeong
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-09-27
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.