A progress report on a prospective randomised trial of open and robotic prostatectomy

European Urology

Volumn 65, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 512-515

  Gardiner, Robert A ^a,b,c   Coughlin, Geoffrey D ^b   Yaxley, John W ^b   Dunglison, Nigel T ^b   Occhipinti, Stefano ^d   Younie, Sandra J ^e   Carter, Rob C ^e   Williams, Scott G ^f   Medcraft, Robyn J ^a   Samaratunga, Hema M ^g   Perry Keene, Joanna L ^h   Payton, Diane J ^h   Lavin, Martin F ^a,i   Chambers, Suzanne K ^a,c,d,j,k  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b ROYAL BRISBANE AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^c EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^d GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^e DEAKIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^f PETER MACCALLUM CANCER CENTRE   (Australia)

^g Aquesta Pathology   (Australia)

^h Anatomical Pathology   (Australia)

ⁱ QIMR BERGHOFER MEDICAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Australia)

^j CANCER COUNCIL QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^k PROSTATE CANCER FOUNDATION OF AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BODY MASS; CANADA; CAUSE OF DEATH; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FUNDING; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; LEARNING CURVE; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; MEDICAL SOCIETY; NOTE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); ROBOT ASSISTED LAPAROSCOPIC PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNOLOGY; SURGICAL TRAINING;

HUMANS; MALE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUEENSLAND; RESEARCH REPORT; ROBOTICS;

EID: 84895057923     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: 18737560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.031     Document Type: Editorial

References (7)

1. A. Close, C. Robertson, and S. Rushton et al. Comparative cost-effectiveness of robot-assisted and standard laparoscopic prostatectomy as alternatives to open radical prostatectomy for treatment of men with localised prostate cancer: a health technology assessment from the perspective of the UK National Health Service Eur Urol 64 2013 361 369
2. Cancer. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Web site. http://www.aihw.gov.au/cancer
3. 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
4. Q.D. Trinh, J. Sammon, and M. Sun et al. Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open radical prostatectomy: results from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample Eur Urol 61 2012 679 685
5. NHMRC additional levels of evidence and grades for recommendations for developers of guidelines. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Web site. https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/-files-nhmrc/file/guidelines/ developers/nhmrc-levels-grades-evidence-120423.pdf.
6. Gordon LG, Reinking S, Mervin C. The financial impact of prostate cancer in Australia. Final report, August 2013. Meadowbrook, Queensland, Australia: Centre for Applied Health Economics, Griffith Health Institute, Griffith University.
7. R.A. Gardiner, J. Yaxley, and G. Coughlin et al. A randomised trial of robotic and open prostatectomy in men with localised prostate cancer BMC Cancer 12 2012 189