Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: A prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases

European Urology

Volumn 65, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 521-531

  Thompson, James E ^a,b,c   Egger, Sam ^d   Böhm, Maret ^b   Haynes, Anne Maree ^b   Matthews, Jayne ^a   Rasiah, Krishan ^a   Stricker, Phillip D ^a,b,c  

^a St Vincent's Prostate Cancer Centre   (Australia)

^b GARVAN INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL RESEARCH   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^d Cancer Council   (Australia)

Author keywords

Comparative study; Learning curve; Oncologic outcomes; Positive surgical margin; Prospective; Quality of life; Radical prostatectomy; Retropubic; Robotic

Indexed keywords

COMPARATIVE STUDY; LEARNING CURVE; ONCOLOGIC OUTCOMES; POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGIN; PROSPECTIVE; QUALITY OF LIFE; RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY; RETROPUBIC; ROBOTIC;

ADULT; AGED; HUMANS; LEARNING CURVE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; QUALITY OF LIFE; ROBOTICS; TIME FACTORS; UROLOGY;

EID: 84895060500     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: 18737560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.030     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. A. Heidenreich, J. Bellmunt, and M. Bolla et al. EAU guidelines on prostate cancer. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease Eur Urol 59 2011 61 71
2. A. Tewari, P. Sooriakumaran, D.A. Bloch, U. Seshadri-Kreaden, A.E. Hebert, and P. Wiklund Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy Eur Urol 62 2012 1 15
3. V. Ficarra, G. Novara, and T.E. Ahlering et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 62 2012 418 430
4. T. Wilson, and R. Torrey Open versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: which is better? Curr Opin Urol 21 2011 200 205
5. G. Novara, V. Ficarra, and S. Mocellin et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 62 2012 382 404
6. Thompson RH, Tollefson M. Prospective randomized trial comparing robotic versus open radical prostatectomy. ClinicalTrials.gov Web site. http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01365143.
7. Darzi A. Open prostatectomy versus laparoscopic prostatectomy versus robot-assisted prostatectomy for organ-confined prostate cancer. International Standard Randomized Controlled Trials Web site. http://www.controlled-trials. com/ISRCTN59410552.
8. 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
9. J.T. Wei, R.L. Dunn, M.S. Litwin, H.M. Sandler, and M.G. Sanda Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer Urology 56 2000 899 905
10. M.S. Litwin, R.D. Hays, A. Fink, P.A. Ganz, B. Leake, and R.H. Brook The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: development, reliability, and validity of a health-related quality of life measure Med Care 36 1998 1002 1012 (Pubitemid 128456439)
11. P.C. Walsh Anatomic radical prostatectomy: evolution of the surgical technique J Urol 160 1998 2418 2424
12. J.B. Eifler, Z. Feng, and B.M. Lin et al. An updated prostate cancer staging nomogram (Partin tables) based on cases from 2006 to 2011 BJU Int 111 2013 22 29
13. B. Rocco, R.F. Coelho, G. Albo, and V.R. Patel Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: surgical technique [in Italian] Minerva Urol Nefrol 62 2010 295 304
14. S.L. Zeger, and K.Y. Liang Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes Biometrics 42 1986 121 130
15. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). Census of population and housing: socio-economic indexes for areas: Australia data. ABS Web site. http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/censushome.nsf/home/seifa?opendocument& navpos=260.
16. Glover J, Tennant S. Remote areas statistical geography in Australia: notes on the Accessibility/Remoteness Index for Australia (ARIA+ version). Working Paper Series No. 9. Public Health Information Development Unit. PublicHealth.gov Web site. http://www.publichealth.gov.au/pdf/reports-papers/ working-papers-other/wk-ppr9-remoteness-aria+.pdf
17. O. Schatloff, S. Chauhan, and D. Kameh et al. Cavernosal nerve preservation during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is a graded rather than an all-or-none phenomenon: objective demonstration by assessment of residual nerve tissue on surgical specimens Urology 79 2012 596 600
18. A.K. Tewari, A. Srivastava, and M.W. Huang et al. Anatomical grades of nerve sparing: a risk-stratified approach to neural-hammock sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) BJU Int 108 2011 984 992
19. N. Doumerc, C. Yuen, and R. Savdie et al. Should experienced open prostatic surgeons convert to robotic surgery? The real learning curve for one surgeon over 3 years BJU Int 106 2010 378 384
20. B. Rocco, D.V. Matei, and S. Melegari et al. Robotic vs open prostatectomy in a laparoscopically naive centre: a matched-pair analysis BJU Int 104 2009 991 995
21. V. Ficarra, G. Novara, and R.C. Rosen et al. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 62 2012 405 417
22. J.A. Smith Jr., R.C. Chan, and S.S. Chang et al. A comparison of the incidence and location of positive surgical margins in robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy J Urol 178 2007 2385 2389 discussion 2389-90
23. S.B. Williams, M.H. Chen, and A.V. D'Amico et al. Radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: likelihood of positive surgical margin(s) Urology 76 2010 1097 1101
24. J.L. Silberstein, D. Su, and L. Glickman et al. A case-mix-adjusted comparison of early oncological outcomes of open and robotic prostatectomy performed by experienced high volume surgeons BJU Int 111 2013 206 212
25. P. Sooriakumaran, M. John, P. Wiklund, D. Lee, A. Nilsson, and A.K. Tewari Learning curve for robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study of 3794 patients Minerva Urol Nefrol 63 2011 191 198
26. E.A. Klein, F.J. Bianco, and A.M. Serio et al. Surgeon experience is strongly associated with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy for all preoperative risk categories J Urol 179 2008 2212 2216 discussion 2216-7
27. F.J. Bianco Jr., A.J. Vickers, and A.M. Cronin et al. Variations among experienced surgeons in cancer control after open radical prostatectomy J Urol 183 2010 977 982
28. A.J. Vickers, C.J. Savage, and F.J. Bianco et al. Surgery confounds biology: the predictive value of stage-, grade- and prostate-specific antigen for recurrence after radical prostatectomy as a function of surgeon experience Int J Cancer 128 2011 1697 1702
29. A.J. Vickers, F.J. Bianco, and A.M. Serio et al. The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy J Natl Cancer Inst 99 2007 1171 1177 (Pubitemid 47233067)
30. T.J. Leroy, D.D. Thiel, and D.A. Duchene et al. Safety and peri-operative outcomes during learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study of fellowship-trained robotic surgeons versus experienced open radical prostatectomy surgeons incorporating robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy J Endourol 24 2010 1665 1669
31. E.O. Kwon, T.C. Bautista, H. Jung, R.Z. Goharderakhshan, S.G. Williams, and G.W. Chien Impact of robotic training on surgical and pathologic outcomes during robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy Urology 76 2010 363 368
32. F.J. Bianco, A.M. Cronin, E.A. Klein, J.E. Pontes, P.T. Scardino, and A.J. Vickers Fellowship training as a modifier of the surgical learning curve Acad Med 85 2010 863 868