Literature DB >> 33001368

Experienced bedside-assistants improve operative outcomes for surgeons early in their learning curve for robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Alaina Garbens1, Aaron H Lay2, Ryan L Steinberg1, Jeffrey C Gahan3,4.   

Abstract

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) relies heavily on the bedside assistant (BA). Currently, the relationship between BA experience and surgical outcomes in robotic surgery is not clear. We examined whether bedside assistant experience can significantly affect positive margin rate and peri-operative outcomes for RALP for surgeons within their learning curve. A retrospective cohort study of a single surgeon's peri-operative outcomes during RALP was examined and compared with and without an experienced bedside assistant. Patient demographic data and peri-operative data, margin rate, and length of stay (LOS), were collected and analyzed. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to determine if expert BA was a predictor of post-operative outcomes. In total, 170 consecutive cases over three years were analyzed. 111 (65%) were performed without an expert BA. The two groups were not significantly different with regards patient demographics (p > 0.05). On univariate analysis, having an expert BA was associated with a significantly lower LOS (31 h ± 21 vs. 42 h ± 26, p = 0.004), EBL (296 ml ± 180 vs. 441 ml ± 305, p < 0.0001) and positive margin rate (20% vs. 37%, p = 0.03). Other surgical outcomes were comparable between groups. On multivariable analysis, expert BA remained a predictor of, EBL (B stat = - 146, 95% CI - 240 to - 52, p = 0.003) and positive margin rate (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.96, p = 0.04). Our results demonstrate that the use of an expert BA may result in improved patient outcomes early in the learning curve of RALP, most notably, positive margin rate and estimated blood loss.
© 2020. Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bedside assistant; Radical prostatectomy; Robotic surgery; Surgical outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33001368     DOI: 10.1007/s11701-020-01146-8

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


  19 in total

1.  General application of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidance for active surveillance for men with prostate cancer is not appropriate in unscreened populations.

Authors:  Lih-Ming Wong; Richard Johnston; Naomi Sharma; Nimish C Shah; Anne Y Warren; David E Neal
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2011-11-11       Impact factor: 5.588

2.  The role of the assistant during robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: does experience matter?

Authors:  Aaron M Potretzke; Brent A Knight; John A Brockman; Joel Vetter; Robert S Figenshau; Sam B Bhayani; Brian M Benway
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-04-02

3.  Robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: assistant's seniority has no influence on perioperative course.

Authors:  Yasmin Abu-Ghanem; Tomer Erlich; Jacob Ramon; Zohar Dotan; Dorit E Zilberman
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-11-09

4.  Does the Level of Assistant Experience Impact Operative Outcomes for Robot-Assisted Partial Nephrectomy?

Authors:  Emmanuel Mitsinikos; George A Abdelsayed; Zoe Bider; Patrick S Kilday; Peter A Elliott; Pooya Banapour; Gary W Chien
Journal:  J Endourol       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 2.942

5.  Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States.

Authors:  William T Lowrance; James A Eastham; Caroline Savage; A C Maschino; Vincent P Laudone; Christopher B Dechet; Robert A Stephenson; Peter T Scardino; Jaspreet S Sandhu
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2012-04-11       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Low annual caseloads of United States surgeons conducting radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Caroline J Savage; Andrew J Vickers
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Karen F Gold; Chris L Pashos; Shilpa S Mehta; Mark S Litwin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2003-02-01       Impact factor: 44.544

8.  Minimally invasive surgery: national trends in adoption and future directions for hospital strategy.

Authors:  Charlotte Tsui; Rachel Klein; Matthew Garabrant
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-05-10       Impact factor: 4.584

Review 9.  Learning curves for urological procedures: a systematic review.

Authors:  Hamid Abboudi; Mohammed Shamim Khan; Khurshid A Guru; Saied Froghi; Gunter de Win; Hendrik Van Poppel; Prokar Dasgupta; Kamran Ahmed
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2013-10-24       Impact factor: 5.588

10.  Impact of assistant surgeon on outcomes in robotic surgery.

Authors:  Rishi Nayyar; Siddharth Yadav; Prabhjot Singh; Prem Nath Dogra
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2016 Jul-Sep
View more
  3 in total

1.  Development of a robot-assisted thoracic surgery (RATS) program. Lessons learned after 2500 cases.

Authors:  Luis Herrera; Juan Escalon; Matthew Johnston; Alexis Sanchez; Renata Sanchez; Ivan Mogollon
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-06-22

Review 2.  Learning curves in laparoscopic and robot-assisted prostate surgery: a systematic search and review.

Authors:  Nikolaos Grivas; Ioannis Zachos; Georgios Georgiadis; Markos Karavitakis; Vasilis Tzortzis; Charalampos Mamoulakis
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-09-04       Impact factor: 3.661

3.  Transition from laparoscopic to robotic liver surgery: clinical outcomes, learning curve effect, and cost-effectiveness.

Authors:  M D'Hondt; A Devooght; E Willems; D Wicherts; C De Meyere; I Parmentier; A Provoost; H Pottel; C Verslype
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2022-03-24
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.