Comparative effectiveness of perineal versus retropubic and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy

Journal of Urology

Volumn 185, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 111-115

  Prasad, Sandip M ^a   Gu, Xiangmei ^b   Lavelle, Rebecca ^a   Lipsitz, Stuart R ^b   Hu, Jim C ^c  

^a Division of Urology   (United States)

^b Center for Surgery and Public Health   (United States)

^c BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Complications; Perineum; Prostate; Prostatectomy; Prostatic neoplasms

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ERECTILE DYSFUNCTION; HORMONAL THERAPY; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICARE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERINEAL RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROPUBIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; URINE INCONTINENCE; UROLOGY;

HUMANS; MALE; PERINEUM; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MINIMALLY INVASIVE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 78649997892     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2010.08.090     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. H.H. Young The early diagnosis and radical cure of carcinoma of the prostate Being a study of 40 cases and presentation of a radical operation which was carried out in four cases Johns Hopkins Hosp Bull 16 1905 315
2. P.C. Walsh, H. Lepor, and J.C. Eggleston Radical prostatectomy with preservation of sexual function: anatomical and pathological considerations Prostate 4 1983 473
3. S.M. Prasad, N.L. Keating, and Q. Wang Variations in surgeon volume and use of pelvic lymph node dissection with open and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy Urology 72 2008 647
4. A. Briganti, M.L. Blute, and J.H. Eastham Pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer Eur Urol 55 2009 1251
5. C.S. Paiva, C. Andreoni, and G.P. Cunha Differences among patients undergoing perineal or retropubic radical prostatectomy in pain and perioperative variables: a prospective study BJU Int 104 2009 1219
6. D.M. Janoff, and R.O. Parra Contemporary appraisal of radical perineal prostatectomy J Urol 173 2005 1863
7. A.L. Potosky, G.F. Riley, and J.D. Lubitz Potential for cancer related health services research using a linked Medicare-tumor registry database Med Care 31 1993 732
8. M.S. Litwin, G.Y. Melmed, and T. Nakazon Life after radical prostatectomy: a longitudinal study J Urol 166 2001 587
9. G.L. Lu-Yao, A.L. Potosky, and P.C. Albertsen Follow-up prostate cancer treatments after radical prostatectomy: a population-based study J Natl Cancer Inst 88 1996 166
10. C.N. Klabunde, A.L. Potosky, and J.M. Legler Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data J Clin Epidemiol 53 2000 1258
11. J.C. Hu, X. Gu, and S.R. Lipsitz Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs. open radical prostatectomy JAMA 302 2009 1557
12. D.B. Rubin Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores Ann Intern Med 127 1997 757
13. P.R. Rosenbaum, and D.B. Rubin Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassifications on the propensity score J Am Stat Assoc 79 1984 516
14. J.M. Robins, M.A. Hernan, and B. Brumback Marginal structural models and causal inference in epidemiology Epidemiology 11 2000 550
15. R.J. Boxer, J.J. Kaufman, and W.E. Goodwin Radical prostatectomy for carcinoma of the prostate: 19511976 A review of 329 patients J Urol 117 1977 208
16. D.L. Bluestein, D.G. Bostwick, and E.J. Bergstralh Eliminating the need for bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy in select patients with prostate cancer J Urol 151 1994 1315
17. S.V. Burgess, F. Atug, and E.P. Castle Cost analysis of radical retropubic, perineal, and robotic prostatectomy J Endourol 20 2006 827
18. V. Mouraviev, I. Nosnik, and L. Sun Financial comparative analysis of minimally invasive surgery to open surgery for localized prostate cancer: a single-institution experience Urology 69 2007 311
19. A.K. Tewari, J.K. Jhaveri, and K. Surasi Benefit of robotic assistance in comparing outcomes of minimally invasive versus open radical prostatectomy J Clin Oncol 26 2008 4999
20. B.F. Shay, J.D. Schmidt, and R. Thomas Urology practice patterns after residency training in radical perineal prostatectomy Urology 60 2002 766
21. J.C. Hu, K.F. Gold, and C.L. Pashos Temporal trends in radical prostatectomy complications from 1991 to 1998 J Urol 169 2003 1443
22. C.M. Cropper The robot is inand ready to operate Business Week March 14, 2005
23. J. Barrett Cutting edge Newsweek December 12, 2005
24. H. Lepor Status of radical prostatectomy in 2009: is there medical evidence to justify the robotic approach? Rev Urol 11 2009 61
25. M.P. Wirth, and M.O. Grimm Words of wisdom. Re: utilization and outcomes of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 54 2008 1439
26. K.A. Guru, A. Hussain, and R. Chandrasekhar Current status of robot-assisted surgery in urology: a multi-national survey of 297 urologic surgeons Can J Urol 16 2009 4736
27. A.M. Glenny, D.G. Altman, and F. Song Indirect comparisons of competing interventions Health Technol Assess 9 2005 1