Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: Results from the nationwide inpatient sample

European Urology

Volumn 61, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 679-685

  Trinh, Quoc Dien ^a,b   Sammon, Jesse ^a   Sun, Maxine ^b   Ravi, Praful ^c   Ghani, Khurshid R ^a   Bianchi, Marco ^d   Jeong, Wooju ^a   Shariat, Shahrokh F ^e   Hansen, Jens ^f   Schmitges, Jan ^f   Jeldres, Claudio ^b   Rogers, Craig G ^a   Peabody, James O ^a   Montorsi, Francesco ^d   Menon, Mani ^a   Karakiewicz, Pierre I ^b  

^a HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM   (United States)

^b CENTRE HOSPITALIER DE L UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

^d VITA SALUTE SAN RAFFAELE UNIVERSITY   (Italy)

^e WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER HAMBURG EPPENDORF   (Germany)

Author keywords

Minimally invasive; Open; Prostatectomy; Prostatic neoplasms; Robotic

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MINIMALLY INVASIVE SURGERY; OPEN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; PERIOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOT ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL APPROACH;

AGED; BLOOD TRANSFUSION; DATABASES, FACTUAL; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HUMANS; INPATIENTS; LAPAROSCOPY; LENGTH OF STAY; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROPENSITY SCORE; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTORS; ROBOTICS; SURGERY, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84857650569     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: 18737560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.12.027     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. A. Jemal, R. Siegel, J. Xu, and E. Ward Cancer statistics, 2010 CA: Cancer J Clin 60 2010 277 300
2. A. Bill-Axelson, L. Holmberg, and M. Ruutu Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer N Engl J Med 364 2011 1708 1717
3. J.C. Hu, Q. Wang, C.L. Pashos, S.R. Lipsitz, and N.L. Keating Utilization and outcomes of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy J Clin Oncol 26 2008 2278 2284
4. J.A. Eastham Robotic-assisted prostatectomy: is there truth in advertising? Eur Urol 54 2008 720 722
5. M. Menon Re: James A. Eastham, robotic-assisted prostatectomy: is there truth in advertising? Eur Urol 55 2009 e1
6. V. Ficarra, G. Novara, and W. Artibani Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies Eur Urol 55 2009 1037 1063
7. D.C. Kang, M.J. Hardee, S.F. Fesperman, T.L. Stoffs, and P. Dahm Low quality of evidence for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: results of a systematic review of the published literature Eur Urol 57 2010 930 937
8. J.C. Hu, X. Gu, and S.R. Lipsitz Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy JAMA 302 2009 1557 1564
9. R. de Vere White Re: comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 57 2010 355 356
10. W.T. Lowrance, E.B. Elkin, P.T. Scardino, and J.A. Eastham Re: comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 57 2010 538
11. P.J. van Leeuwen Re: Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 57 2010 539 540
12. M.E. Charlson, P. Pompei, K.L. Ales, and C.R. MacKenzie A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation J Chronic Dis 40 1987 373 383 (Pubitemid 17055592)
13. R.A. Deyo, D. Cherkin, and M. Ciol Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative database J Clin Epidemiol 45 1992 613 619
14. United States Census Bureau. 2000.
15. R.B. D'Agostino Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group Statist Med 17 1998 2265 2281
16. T.A. Stukel, E.S. Fisher, D.E. Wennberg, D.A. Alter, D.J. Gottlieb, and M.J. Vermeulen Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods JAMA 297 2007 278 285 (Pubitemid 46143305)
17. F.J. Vittimberga Jr., D.P. Foley, W.C. Meyers, and M.P. Callery Laparoscopic surgery and the systemic immune response Ann Surg 227 1998 326 334 (Pubitemid 28131012)
18. W.T. Lowrance, E.B. Elkin, and L.M. Jacks Comparative effectiveness of prostate cancer surgical treatments: a population based analysis of postoperative outcomes J Urol 183 2010 1366 1372
19. J. Schmitges, Q.-D. Trinh, and F. Abdollah A population-based analysis of temporal perioperative complication rates after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 60 2011 564 571
20. B.A. Spencer, D.C. Miller, and M.S. Litwin Variations in quality of care for men with early-stage prostate cancer J Clin Oncol 26 2008 3735 3742
21. Q.D. Trinh, J. Schmitges, and M. Sun Radical prostatectomy at academic versus nonacademic institutions: a population based analysis J Urol 186 2011 1849 1854
22. Trinh QD, Schmitges J, Sun M, et al. Morbidity and mortality of radical prostatectomy differs by insurance status. Cancer. In press. doi:10.1002/cncr.26475.
23. M.N. Simmons, and I.S. Gill Decreased complications of contemporary laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: use of a standardized reporting system J Urol 177 2007 2067 2073 discussion 2073 (Pubitemid 46726399)
24. L. Nogueira, D. Katz, and R. Pinochet Critical evaluation of perioperative complications in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy Urology 75 2010 288 294