Comparison of open and robotic-assisted prostatectomy: The University of British Columbia experience

被引:22
|
作者
Gagnon, Louis-Olivier
Goldenberg, S. Larry
Lynch, Kenny
Hurtado, Antonio
Gleave, Martin E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ British Columbia, Vancouver Prostate Ctr, Vancouver, BC V6H 3Z6, Canada
来源
CUAJ-CANADIAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL | 2014年 / 8卷 / 3-4期
关键词
OPEN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; CANCER; OUTCOMES; SURGERY; VOLUME;
D O I
10.5489/cuaj.1707
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: We assessed outcomes and costs of open prostatectomy (OP) versus robotic-assisted prostatectomy (RAP) at a single tertiary care university hospital. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 200 consecutive OP by 1 experienced open surgeon (MG) and 200 consecutive RAP by an experienced open surgeon (SLG), after allowing for a short learning curve of 70 cases. Results: The 2 groups had similar demographics, including mean age (64.7 vs. 64.2) and mean body mass index (27.2 vs. 27.2). The OP group had a higher proportion of higher risk cancers compared to the RAP group (32.5% vs. 8.5%). Mean skin-to-skin operative room time was less for the OP (114.2 vs. 234.1 minutes). Transfusion rates were similar at 1.5% with OP compared to 3.5% with RAP. The mean length of stay was 1.78 days for OP compared to 1.76 days for RAP, for the last 100 patients in each group. The OP group had more high-grade disease in the prostatectomy specimen, with Gleason >= 8 in 23.5% compared to 3.5% in the RAP group. Positive surgical margin rates were comparable at 31% for OP and 24.6% for RAP, and remained similar after stratification for pT2 and pT3 disease. The grade I and II perioperative complication rate (Clavien-Dindo classification) was lower in the OP group (8.5% vs. 20%). Postoperative stress urinary incontinence rates (4.8% for OP and 4.6% for RAP) and biochemical-free status (91.8% for OP and 96% for RAP) did not differ at 12 months post-surgery. The additional cost of RAP was calculated as $5629 per case. The main limitations of this study are its retrospective nature and lack of validated questionnaires for evaluation of postoperative functional outcomes. Conclusion: While hospital length of stay, transfusion rates, positive surgical margin rates and postoperative urinary incontinence were similar, OP had a shorter operative time and a lower cost compared to the very early experience of RAP. Future parallel prospective analysis will address the impact of the learning curve on these outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:92 / 97
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in 2010
    Singh, Iqbal
    Hemal, Ashok K.
    EXPERT REVIEW OF ANTICANCER THERAPY, 2010, 10 (05) : 671 - 682
  • [22] Robotic-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy
    Agarwal, Gautum
    Valderrama, Oscar
    Luchey, Adam M.
    Pow-Sang, Julio M.
    CANCER CONTROL, 2015, 22 (03) : 283 - 290
  • [23] Salvage Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Experience with 14 Cases
    Ou, Yen-Chuan
    Hung, Sheng-Chun
    Hwang, Li-Hua
    Yang, Chun-Kuang
    Hung, Siu-Wan
    Tung, Min-Che
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2017, 37 (04) : 2045 - 2050
  • [24] Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy - the 5-year Romanian experience
    Logigan, Horia
    Andras, Julia
    Pop, Cristian-Doru
    Muresan, Marius
    Crisan, Nicolae
    Coman, Ioan
    JOURNAL OF BUON, 2015, 20 (04): : 1068 - 1073
  • [25] Predictors of costs for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Bolenz, Christian
    Gupta, Amit
    Roehrborn, Claus G.
    Lotan, Yair
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2011, 29 (03) : 325 - 329
  • [26] Clipless Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Impact on Outcomes
    Basourakos, Spyridon P.
    Zhu, Alec
    Lewicki, Patrick J.
    Ramaswamy, Ashwin
    Cheng, Emily
    Dudley, Vanessa
    Yu, Miko
    Karir, Beerinder
    Hung, Andrew J.
    Khani, Francesca
    Hu, Jim C.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS, 2022, 8 (05): : 1176 - 1185
  • [27] Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy and Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy: Likelihood of Positive Surgical Margin(s)
    Williams, Stephen B.
    Chen, Ming-Hui
    D'Amico, Anthony V.
    Weinberg, Aaron C.
    Kacker, Ravi
    Hirsch, Michelle S.
    Richie, Jerome P.
    Hu, Jim C.
    UROLOGY, 2010, 76 (05) : 1097 - 1101
  • [28] Robotic-assisted vs. open radical prostatectomy: an update to the never-ending debate
    Chandrasekar, Thenappan
    Tilki, Derya
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2018, 7 : S120 - S123
  • [29] Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy versus open simple prostatectomy: a New York statewide analysis of early adoption and outcomes between 2009 and 2017
    Ravivarapu, Krishna T.
    Omidele, Olamide
    Pfail, John
    Tomer, Nir
    Small, Alexander C.
    Palese, Michael A.
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2021, 15 (04) : 627 - 633
  • [30] Contemporary national comparison of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic pediatric pyeloplasty
    Liu, Dennis B.
    Ellimoottil, Chandy
    Flum, Andrew S.
    Casey, Jessica T.
    Gong, Edward M.
    JOURNAL OF PEDIATRIC UROLOGY, 2014, 10 (04) : 610 - 615