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
  • [31] Laparoscopic robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy: a case-matched comparison with open resection
    Chalikonda, S.
    Aguilar-Saavedra, J. R.
    Walsh, R. M.
    SURGICAL ENDOSCOPY AND OTHER INTERVENTIONAL TECHNIQUES, 2012, 26 (09): : 2397 - 2402
  • [32] Open vs. robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: A single surgeon and pathologist comparison of pathologic and oncologic outcomes
    Masterson, Timothy A.
    Cheng, Liang
    Boris, Ronald S.
    Koch, Michael O.
    UROLOGIC ONCOLOGY-SEMINARS AND ORIGINAL INVESTIGATIONS, 2013, 31 (07) : 1043 - 1048
  • [33] The intraoperative management of robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy
    Chiumello, Davide
    Fratti, Isabella
    Coppola, Silvia
    CURRENT OPINION IN ANESTHESIOLOGY, 2023, 36 (06) : 657 - 665
  • [34] Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
    Nelson, Joel B.
    ONCOLOGY-NEW YORK, 2012, 26 (07): : 622 - +
  • [35] Robotic-Assisted Neck Dissection: Our Experience
    Poma, Salvatore
    Modica, Domenico Michele
    Pitruzzella, Alessandro
    Fucarino, Alberto
    Mattina, Gianfranco
    Fasola, Salvatore
    Pirrello, Daniele
    Galfano, Giuseppe Mario
    INTERNATIONAL ARCHIVES OF OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY, 2022, 26 (01) : E178 - E182
  • [36] Outcomes assessment in men undergoing open retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Keith J. Kowalczyk
    Hua-yin Yu
    William Ulmer
    Stephen B. Williams
    Jim C. Hu
    World Journal of Urology, 2012, 30 : 85 - 89
  • [37] Prophylactic Robotic-assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Preoperative Suspicion of Prostate Cancer: Experience with 55 Cases
    Ou, Yen-Chuan
    Weng, Wei-Chun
    Chang, Kuangh-Si
    Mei, Cheng-En
    Yang, Chun Kuang
    Hung, Siu-Wan
    Wang, John
    Tung, Min-Che
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2016, 36 (09) : 4895 - 4901
  • [38] Economic Evaluation of Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
    Bejrananda, Tanan
    Khaing, Win
    Veettil, Sajesh K.
    Thongseiratch, Therdpong
    Chaiyakunapruk, Nathorn
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY OPEN SCIENCE, 2025, 72 : 17 - 28
  • [39] Cost-effectiveness of Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer in the UK
    Labban, Muhieddine
    Dasgupta, Prokar
    Song, Chao
    Becker, Russell
    Li, Yanli
    Kreaden, Usha Seshadri
    Trinh, Quoc-Dien
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2022, 5 (04) : E225740
  • [40] Robotic-assisted vs. open ureteral reimplantation: a multicentre comparison
    Ziewers, Stefanie
    Dotzauer, Robert
    Thomas, Anita
    Brandt, Maximilian P.
    Haferkamp, Axel
    Frees, Sebastian
    Zugor, Vahudin
    Kajaia, David
    Labanaris, Apostolos
    Kouriefs, Chrysanthos
    Radu, Cosmin
    Radavoi, Daniel
    Jinga, Viorel
    Mirvald, Cristian
    Sinescu, Ioanel
    Surcel, Cristian
    Tsaur, Igor
    WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 42 (01)