Faulty analysis in study of robotic-assisted minimally invasive radical prostatectomy

JAMA Surgery

Volumn 150, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 371-372

  Rosa, Dave ^a   Mohr, Catherine ^a  

^a INTUITIVE SURGICAL INC   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA BASE; HUMAN; LETTER; MALE; PATIENT SAFETY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOT ASSISTED SURGERY; UNITED STATES; DEVICES; MASS COMMUNICATION; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTICS;

DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT SAFETY; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTICS;

EID: 84928136662     PISSN: 21686254     EISSN: 21686262     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2015.42     Document Type: Letter

References (6)

1. Parsons JK, Messer K, Palazzi K, Stroup SP, Chang D. Diffusion of surgical innovations, patient safety, and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(8):845-851.
2. Allaf ME, Partin AW. Robotic prostatectomy diffusion safety concerns: reality or just illusion? JAMA Surg. 2014;149(8):852.
3. Liu JJ, Maxwell BG, Panousis P, Chung BI. Perioperative outcomes for laparoscopic and robotic compared with open prostatectomy using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. Urology. 2013;82(3):579-583.
4. Kowalczyk KJ, Levy JM, Caplan CF, 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. 2012;61(4):803-809.
5. Hu JC, Gu X, Lipsitz SR, et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA. 2009;302(14):1557-1564.
6. Davis JW, Kreaden US, Gabbert J, Thomas R. Learning curve assessment of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open-surgery controls from the Premier Perspective Database. J Endourol. 2014;28(5):560-566.