Development and application of Reverse Systematic Review on laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

被引:10
|
作者
Costa Moretti, Tomas Bernardo [1 ,2 ]
Magna, Luis Alberto [3 ]
Reis, Leonardo Oliveira [1 ,4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Campinas UNICAMP, Dept Urol, Campinas, SP, Brazil
[2] IUP, Piracicaba, SP, Brazil
[3] Univ Campinas UNICAMP, Dept Genet, Campinas, SP, Brazil
[4] UroScience, Campinas, SP, Brazil
[5] Pontifical Catholic Univ Campinas PUC Campinas, Campinas, SP, Brazil
关键词
Prostatectomy; Methodology; Reverse systematic review; Research design; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.06.004
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Context: Evidence-based medicine was widely used in the context of diverse surgical treatments through several systematic reviews (SR). Despite the high level of evidence from these reviews, the specificity of the analyzed outcomes makes it difficult to establish the state of maturity of the analyzed technique neglecting significant bias. Objective: To describe a novel SR methodology based on a temporal population analysis in a Reverse Systematic Review utilizing the case of well-established laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Evidence acquisition: A systematized search was performed in order to obtain the primary studies feeding SR for the composition of a complete database, covering clinical-surgical and bibliometric variables. Quantitative, qualitative, and temporal correlations of studies variables were performed to determine trends regarding results, geographic distribution and bibliometrics to delineate the development and trends of LRP between 2000 and 2017. Evidence synthesis: Among a total of 353 SR found, 40 were included and provided 238 primary studies elected to the database composition. An accumulation of studies was found on the Europe-USA axis predominantly in 4 preeminent scientific journals, which scientifically influenced the profile of publications, mainly until 2011 when interest clearly migrates to robotic-assisted surgery reducing the influence of these centers in the development of LRP in an upfront reversal in the standard of publications with a clear shift between LRP and robotic-assisted surgery studies. Operative time, blood loss, and conversion to open surgery showed trend to reduction and only biochemical recurrence (among PENTAFECTA) positively correlated with the year of publication, all with stabilization throughout the period. Conclusion: The Reverse Systematic Review proved to be feasible and effective in demonstrating the evolution of a surgical technique, outlining its "Natural History," which is not captured in the standard SR. In addition, it allowed to identify the presence of scientific influencers and potential biases in the composition of the best evidence in the literature, as well as to trace the curves of development until its technical-scientific maturity. Further studies to test the reproducibility of this methodology may aid in the comparison of diverse surgical techniques. Patient summary: This temporal study analyzed the variables inherent to the publications and the patients in the primary studies of SRs that approached a specific surgical technique. The results demonstrated the scientific maturity of the technique and the vulnerability to scientific influencers in the history of its development. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:647 / 658
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A European virus
    Skrekas, T
    Laguna, MP
    De La Rosette, JJMCH
    MINIMALLY INVASIVE THERAPY & ALLIED TECHNOLOGIES, 2005, 14 (02) : 98 - 103
  • [32] Update on robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Matsunaga, Garrett S.
    Ahlering, Thomas E.
    Skarecky, Douglas W.
    THESCIENTIFICWORLDJOURNAL, 2006, 6 : 2542 - 2552
  • [33] Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: current techniques
    Levinson, Adam W.
    Su, Li-Ming
    CURRENT OPINION IN UROLOGY, 2007, 17 (02) : 98 - 103
  • [34] Open versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Janetschek, G
    Montorsi, F
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2006, 5 (03) : 377 - 384
  • [35] The impact of obesity on laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Eden, Christopher G.
    Chang, Christopher M.
    Gianduzzo, Troy
    Moon, Daniel A.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2006, 98 (06) : 1279 - 1282
  • [36] Transperitoneal Versus Extraperitoneal Approach for Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Purnomo, Stefanus
    Hamid, Agus Rizal Ardy Hariandy
    Siregar, Moammar Andar Roemare
    Afriansyah, Andika
    Mirza, Hendy
    Seno, Doddy Hami
    Purnomo, Nugroho
    UROLOGY RESEARCH AND PRACTICE, 2023, 49 (05) : 285 - 292
  • [37] Systematic review of the ophthalmic complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy
    Rabinowitz, Joshua
    Kinnear, Ned
    O'Callaghan, Michael
    Hennessey, Derek
    Shafi, Fariha
    Fuller, Andrew
    Ibrahim, Mohamed
    Lane, Timothy
    Adshead, James
    Vasdev, Nikhil
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2024, 18 (01)
  • [38] Anesthetic concerns for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Gainsburg, D. M.
    MINERVA ANESTESIOLOGICA, 2012, 78 (05) : 596 - 604
  • [39] Comparison of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Open Radical Prostatectomy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Seo, Hyun-Ju
    Lee, Na Rae
    Son, Soo Kyung
    Kim, Dae Keun
    Rha, Koon Ho
    Lee, Seon Heui
    YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2016, 57 (05) : 1165 - 1177
  • [40] Urinary continence following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Qualitative analysis
    Erauso, A.
    Perrouin-Verbe, M. -A.
    Papin, G.
    Volant, A.
    Doucet, L.
    Joulin, V.
    Deruelle, C.
    Rousseau, B.
    Valeri, A.
    Fournier, G.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2012, 22 (15): : 945 - 953