Biochemical recurrence-free survival after robotic-assisted laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer

Urology

Volumn 83, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1309-1315

  Ritch, Chad R ^a   You, Chaochen ^a   May, Alexandra T ^a   Herrell, S Duke ^a   Clark, Peter E ^a   Penson, David F ^a   Chang, Sam S ^a   Cookson, Michael S ^b   Smith, Joseph A ^a   Barocas, Daniel A ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b University of Oklahoma Medical Center   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGEN;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOCHEMICAL RECURRENCE FREE SURVIVAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; FOLLOW UP; GLEASON SCORE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KAPLAN MEIER METHOD; LAPAROSCOPIC SURGERY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; ROBOTICS; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

COHORT STUDIES; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; KAPLAN-MEIER ESTIMATE; LAPAROSCOPY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROBOTICS; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UROLOGIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES, MALE;

EID: 84901585412     PISSN: 00904295     EISSN: 15279995     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2014.02.023     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. R. Siegel, D. Naishadham, and A. Jemal Cancer statistics, 2013 CA Cancer J Clin 63 2013 11 30
2. M.J. Resnick, T. Koyama, and K.H. Fan et al. Long-term functional outcomes after treatment for localized prostate cancer N Engl J Med 368 2013 436 445
3. A.J. Stephenson, M.W. Kattan, and J.A. Eastham et al. Prostate cancer-specific mortality after radical prostatectomy for patients treated in the prostate-specific antigen era J Clin Oncol 27 2009 4300 4305
4. A.V. D'Amico, R. Whittington, and S.B. Malkowicz et al. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer JAMA 280 1998 969 974
5. J.R. Rider, F. Sandin, and O. Andren et al. Long-term outcomes among noncuratively treated men according to prostate cancer risk category in a nationwide, population-based study Eur Urol 63 2013 88 96
6. M.R. Cooperberg, D.P. Lubeck, and M.V. Meng et al. The changing face of low-risk prostate cancer: trends in clinical presentation and primary management J Clin Oncol 22 2004 2141 2149
7. A. Ingels, A. de la Taille, and G. Ploussard Radical prostatectomy as primary treatment of high-risk prostate cancer Curr Urol Rep 13 2012 179 186
8. L.C. Harlan, A. Potosky, and F.D. Gilliland et al. Factors associated with initial therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer: prostate cancer outcomes study J Natl Cancer Inst 93 2001 1864 1871
9. J. Binder, and W. Kramer Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy BJU Int 87 2001 408 410
10. K.J. Kowalczyk, J.M. Levy, and C.F. Caplan et al. Temporal national trends of minimally invasive and retropubic radical prostatectomy outcomes from 2003 to 2007: results from the 100% Medicare sample Eur Urol 61 2012 803 809
11. D.A. Barocas, S. Salem, and Y. Kordan et al. Robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: comparison of short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival J Urol 183 2010 990 996
12. A. Tewari, P. Sooriakumaran, and D.A. Bloch et al. 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
13. S.M. Prasad, and A.L. Shalhav Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive versus open lymphadenectomy in urological cancers Curr Opin Urol 23 2013 57 64
14. M.R. Cooperberg, D.P. Lubeck, and S.S. Mehta et al. Time trends in clinical risk stratification for prostate cancer: implications for outcomes (data from CaPSURE) J Urol 170 2003 S21 S25 discussion S26-7
15. W.T. Lowrance, J.A. Eastham, and C. Savage et al. Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States J Urol 187 2012 2087 2092
16. T.J. Wilt, M.K. Brawer, and K.M. Jones et al. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer N Engl J Med 367 2012 203 213
17. P.A. Harris, R. Taylor, and R. Thielke et al. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support J Biomed Inform 42 2009 377 381
18. J.R. Srigley Key issues in handling and reporting radical prostatectomy specimens Arch Pathol Lab Med 130 2006 303 317
19. M.S. Cookson, G. Aus, and A.L. Burnett et al. Variation in the definition of biochemical recurrence in patients treated for localized prostate cancer: the American Urological Association Prostate Guidelines for Localized Prostate Cancer Update Panel report and recommendations for a standard in the reporting of surgical outcomes J Urol 177 2007 540 545
20. F.E. Harrell Regression Modeling Strategies: With Applications to Linear Models, Logistic Regression, and Survival Analysis 2001 Springer New York
21. S.A. Boorjian, R.J. Karnes, and R. Viterbo et al. Long-term survival after radical prostatectomy versus external-beam radiotherapy for patients with high-risk prostate cancer Cancer 117 2011 2883 2891
22. A.E. Krambeck, D.S. DiMarco, and L.J. Rangel et al. Radical prostatectomy for prostatic adenocarcinoma: a matched comparison of open retropubic and robot-assisted techniques BJU Int 103 2009 448 453
23. A. Tewari, A. Srivasatava, and M. Menon et al. A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution BJU Int 92 2003 205 210
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.M. Pierorazio, J.K. Mullins, and J.B. Eifler et al. Contemporaneous comparison of open vs minimally-invasive radical prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer BJU Int 112 2013 751 757
26. A.M. Murphy, D.S. Berkman, and M. Desai et al. The number of negative pelvic lymph nodes removed does not affect the risk of biochemical failure after radical prostatectomy BJU Int 105 2010 176 179
27. D. Sagalovich, A. Calaway, and A. Srivastava et al. Assessment of required nodal yield in a high risk cohort undergoing extended pelvic lymphadenectomy in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy and its impact on functional outcomes BJU Int 111 2013 85 94
28. J.C. Hu, X. Gu, and S.R. Lipsitz et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy JAMA 302 2009 1557 1564
29. 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