Literature DB >> 30003407

Safety and feasibility of outpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Pooya Banapour1, Peter Elliott2, Ramzi Jabaji2, Ashish Parekh3, Apurba Pathak3, Madhur Merchant3, Kirk Tamaddon3.   

Abstract

Since its inception, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has developed into a familiar surgical modality with improved perioperative outcomes including decreased hospital stay for localized prostate cancer patients. Experience with outpatient RARP has been reported as early as 2010. In this study, we evaluate the safety and feasibility of outpatient RARP by comparing perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing outpatient RARP to patients discharged on the day following surgery. This is a single-institution retrospective cohort study. Patients with localized disease who underwent RARP without pelvic lymph node dissection from September 2017 to January 2018 were included. T tests and Chi-squared analysis were used to compare demographic and perioperative characteristics of patients who were discharged on the same day of surgery (outpatient RARP) to patients discharged on the day after surgery (inpatient RARP). Of the 51 patients included in the study, 26 underwent outpatient RARP while 25 underwent inpatient RARP. There was no significant difference in mean age (61.4 vs 65.8 years, p = 0.05), BMI (27.1 vs 28.3 kg/m2, p = 0.35), ethnicity, tobacco use (8 vs 15%, p = 0.41), PSA (8.7 vs 8.4 ng/dL, p = 0.77), biopsy Gleason score distribution, prostate size (51.8 vs 57.7 cc, p = 0.26) or preoperative hemoglobin (14.3 vs 13.4 g/dL, p = 0.06), respectively. There was no significant difference between operative time (95.3 vs 101 min, p = 0.16), EBL (52.8 vs 66.5 cc, p = 0.08), postoperative change in hemoglobin (- 1 vs - 1.1 g/dL, p = 0.62), pathologic stage distribution or complication rate (4 vs 8%, p = 0.58) between patients who underwent outpatient vs inpatient RARP, respectively. Outpatient RARP offers similar or improved perioperative outcomes when compared to inpatient RARP. We advocate outpatient RARP as a safe and feasible alternative to inpatient RARP for appropriately selected prostate cancer patients. Furthermore, we introduce an outpatient model that can be applied to other institutions seeking to implement outpatient RARP.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Outpatient prostatectomy; Outpatient robotic surgery; Prostate cancer; Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy; Robotic prostatectomy; Safety of robotic surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30003407     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-018-0848-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Robot Surg        ISSN: 1863-2483


  5 in total

1.  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

2.  Routine Postoperative Hemoglobin Assessment Poorly PredictsTransfusion Requirement among Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Gregory T Chesnut; Nicole Benfante; David Barham; Lucas W Dean; Amy Tin; Daniel D Sjoberg; Peter T Scardino; James A Eastham; Behfar Ehdaie; Jonathan A Coleman; Timothy F Donahue; Karim A Touijer; Vincent P Laudone
Journal:  Urol Pract       Date:  2020-07

3.  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 4.  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.  Reducing postoperative opioid pill prescribing via a quality improvement approach.

Authors:  Kristian D Stensland; Peter Chang; David Jiang; David Canes; Aaron Berkenwald; Adrian Waisman; Kortney Robinson; Gabriel Brat; Catrina Crociani; Kyle Mcanally; Sarah Hyde; Brian Holliday; Jodi Mechaber; Analesa Baraka; Alireza Moinzadeh; Andrew A Wagner
Journal:  Int J Qual Health Care       Date:  2021-07-17       Impact factor: 2.257

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.