James E Thompson1, Sam Egger2, Maret Böhm3, Amila R Siriwardana4, Anne-Maree Haynes3, Jayne Matthews5, Matthijs J Scheltema6, Phillip D Stricker7. 1. St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia; Garvan Institute of Medical Research & The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia; The University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: drjethompson@gmail.com. 2. Cancer Council NSW, Woolloomooloo, NSW, Australia. 3. Garvan Institute of Medical Research & The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia. 4. St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia; Garvan Institute of Medical Research & The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia. 5. St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia. 6. St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia; Garvan Institute of Medical Research & The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia; Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 7. St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia; Garvan Institute of Medical Research & The Kinghorn Cancer Centre, Darlinghurst, NSW, Australia; The University of New South Wales, Kensington, NSW, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our earlier analysis suggested that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) achieved superiority over open radical prostatectomy (ORP) in terms of positive surgical margin (PSM) rates and functional outcomes. OBJECTIVE: With larger sample size and longer follow-up, the objective of this study update is to assess whether our previous findings are upheld and whether the improved PSM rates for RARP after an initial learning curve compared with ORP-as observed in our earlier analysis-ultimately resulted in improved biochemical control. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective observational study comparing two surgical techniques; 2271 consecutive men underwent RARP (1520) or ORP (751) at a single centre from 2006 to 2016. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Demographic and clinicopathological data were prospectively collected. The EPIC-QOL questionnaire was administered at baseline and 1.5, 3, 6, 12, and 24 mo. Multivariate linear regression modelled the difference in quality of life (QOL) domains against case number; logistic and Cox regression modelled the differences in PSM and biochemical recurrence (BCR) hazard ratios (HR), respectively. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 2206 men were included in BCR/PSM analysis and 1045 consented for QOL analysis. Superior pT2 surgical margins, early and late sexual outcomes, and early urinary outcomes were upheld and became more robust (narrowing of 95% confidence intervals [CIs]). The risk of BCR was initially higher for RARP, improved after 191 RARPs, and was 35% lower (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% CI 0.47-0.90) at final RARP, plateauing after 226 RARPs. Improved late (12-24 mo) urinary bother scores (adjusted mean difference [AMD]=4.7, 95% CI 1.3-8.0) and irritative-obstructive scores (AMD=3.8, 95% CI 0.9-5.6) at final RARP were demonstrated. Limitations include observational single surgeon data, possible residual confounding, and short follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this updated analysis demonstrate that RARP can be beneficial for patients of high-volume surgeons, although more randomised studies and studies with survival outcomes are needed. PATIENT SUMMARY: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was able to improve functional and oncological outcomes in this single surgeon's learning curve.
BACKGROUND: Our earlier analysis suggested that robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) achieved superiority over open radical prostatectomy (ORP) in terms of positive surgical margin (PSM) rates and functional outcomes. OBJECTIVE: With larger sample size and longer follow-up, the objective of this study update is to assess whether our previous findings are upheld and whether the improved PSM rates for RARP after an initial learning curve compared with ORP-as observed in our earlier analysis-ultimately resulted in improved biochemical control. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective observational study comparing two surgical techniques; 2271 consecutive men underwent RARP (1520) or ORP (751) at a single centre from 2006 to 2016. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Demographic and clinicopathological data were prospectively collected. The EPIC-QOL questionnaire was administered at baseline and 1.5, 3, 6, 12, and 24 mo. Multivariate linear regression modelled the difference in quality of life (QOL) domains against case number; logistic and Cox regression modelled the differences in PSM and biochemical recurrence (BCR) hazard ratios (HR), respectively. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A total of 2206 men were included in BCR/PSM analysis and 1045 consented for QOL analysis. Superior pT2 surgical margins, early and late sexual outcomes, and early urinary outcomes were upheld and became more robust (narrowing of 95% confidence intervals [CIs]). The risk of BCR was initially higher for RARP, improved after 191 RARPs, and was 35% lower (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% CI 0.47-0.90) at final RARP, plateauing after 226 RARPs. Improved late (12-24 mo) urinary bother scores (adjusted mean difference [AMD]=4.7, 95% CI 1.3-8.0) and irritative-obstructive scores (AMD=3.8, 95% CI 0.9-5.6) at final RARP were demonstrated. Limitations include observational single surgeon data, possible residual confounding, and short follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this updated analysis demonstrate that RARP can be beneficial for patients of high-volume surgeons, although more randomised studies and studies with survival outcomes are needed. PATIENT SUMMARY: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy was able to improve functional and oncological outcomes in this single surgeon's learning curve.
Authors: Erika Palagonia; Elio Mazzone; Geert De Naeyer; Frederiek D'Hondt; Justin Collins; Pawel Wisz; Fijs W B Van Leeuwen; Henk Van Der Poel; Peter Schatteman; Alexandre Mottrie; Paolo Dell'Oglio Journal: World J Urol Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Peter A Elliott; Stephanie Hsiang; Ramkishen Narayanan; James Bierylo; Shu-Ching Chang; Przemyslaw Twardowski; Timothy G Wilson Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2021-01-11
Authors: Andrew Lai; Ryan W Dobbs; Susan Talamini; Whitney R Halgrimson; Jessica O Wilson; Hari T Vigneswaran; Simone Crivellaro Journal: Transl Androl Urol Date: 2020-04