The Comparative Harms of Open and Robotic Prostatectomy in Population Based Samples

Journal of Urology

Volumn 195, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 321-329

  O'Neil, Brock ^a   Koyama, Tatsuki ^b   Alvarez, Joann ^b   Conwill, Ralph M ^d   Albertsen, Peter C ^e   Cooperberg, Matthew R ^f   Goodman, Michael ⁱ   Greenfield, Sheldon ^g   Hamilton, Ann S ^h   Hoffman, Karen E ^j   Hoffman, Richard M ^k   Kaplan, Sherrie H ^g   Stanford, Janet L ^l   Stroup, Antoinette M ^m   Paddock, Lisa E ^m   Wu, Xiao Cheng ⁿ   Stephenson, Robert A ^o   Resnick, Matthew J ^a,c   Barocas, Daniel A ^a   Penson, David F ^a,c  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d CEASAR Patient Advocacy Network   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CONNECTICUT HEALTH CENTER   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

ⁱ EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^k UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^l Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center   (United States)

^m New Jersey State Cancer Registry   (United States)

ⁿ LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES CENTER   (United States)

^o UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

patient outcome assessment; prostatectomy; robotics

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER SURGERY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTINENCE; FUNCTIONAL STATUS; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; PROSTATECTOMY; ROBOT ASSISTED SURGERY; SCORING SYSTEM; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SEXUAL FUNCTION; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL RISK; URINARY TRACT FUNCTION; ADVERSE EFFECTS; CANCER REGISTRY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; MULTICENTER STUDY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROCEDURES; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

AGED; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; PROSTATECTOMY; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; ROBOTIC SURGICAL PROCEDURES; SEER PROGRAM; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84953768676     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: 15273792     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2015.08.092     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. C.B. Anderson, D.F. Penson, S. Ni, and et al. Centralization of radical prostatectomy in the United States J Urol 189 2013 500
2. S.B. Farnham, T.M. Webster, S.D. Herrell, and et al. Intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements for robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy Urology 67 2006 360
3. B. Nelson, M. Kaufman, G. Broughton, and et al. Comparison of length of hospital stay between radical retropubic prostatectomy and robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy J Urol 177 2007 929
4. J.A. Smith Jr., R.C. Chan, S.S. Chang, and 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
5. M. Menon, A. Shrivastava, S. Kaul, and et al. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: contemporary technique and analysis of results Eur Urol 51 2007 648
6. B. Rocco, D.V. Matei, S. Melegari, and et al. Robotic vs open prostatectomy in a laparoscopically naive centre: a matched-pair analysis BJU Int 104 2009 991
7. A.E. Krambeck, D.S. DiMarco, L.J. Rangel, and et al. Radical prostatectomy for prostatic adenocarcinoma: a matched comparison of open retropubic and robot-assisted techniques BJU Int 103 2009 448
8. J.E. Thompson, S. Egger, M. Bohm, and et al. 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 Eur Urol 65 2014 521
9. J.C. Hu, X. Gu, S.R. Lipsitz, and et al. Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy JAMA 302 2009 1557
10. Q.D. Trinh, J. Sammon, M. Sun, and 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
11. K.J. Kowalczyk, J.M. Levy, C.F. Caplan, and 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
12. M. Alemozaffar, M. Sanda, D. Yecies, and et al. Benchmarks for operative outcomes of robotic and open radical prostatectomy: results from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study Eur Urol 67 2014 432
13. J.C. Hu, G. Gandaglia, P.I. Karakiewicz, and et al. Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy cancer control Eur Urol 66 2014 666
14. A. Wallerstedt, S.I. Tyritzis, T. Thorsteinsdottir, and et al. Short-term results after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy compared to open radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 67 2014 660
15. G. Gandaglia, J.D. Sammon, S.L. Chang, and et al. Comparative effectiveness of robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy in the postdissemination era J Clin Oncol 32 2014 1419
16. L. Hohwu, M. Borre, L. Ehlers, and et al. A short-term cost-effectiveness study comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and open retropubic radical prostatectomy J Med Econ 14 2011 403
17. Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Robotic Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy, ClinicalTrials.gov 2015 (NCT01365143).
18. R.A. Gardiner, J. Yaxley, G. Coughlin, and et al. A randomised trial of robotic and open prostatectomy in men with localised prostate cancer BMC Cancer 12 2012 189
19. A.L. Potosky, J. Legler, P.C. Albertsen, and et al. Health outcomes after prostatectomy or radiotherapy for prostate cancer: results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study J Natl Cancer Inst 92 2000 1582
20. D.P. Lubeck, M.S. Litwin, J.M. Henning, and et al. The CaPSURE database: a methodology for clinical practice and research in prostate cancer. CaPSURE Research Panel. Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor Urology 48 1996 773
21. D.A. Barocas, V. Chen, M. Cooperberg, and et al. Using a population-based observational cohort study to address difficult comparative effectiveness research questions: the CEASAR study J Comp Eff Res 2 2013 445
22. M.S. Litwin, R.D. Hays, A. Fink, and et al. The UCLA Prostate Cancer Index: development, reliability, and validity of a health-related quality of life measure Med Care 36 1998 1002
23. S. Namiki, M. Takegami, Y. Kakehi, and et al. Analysis linking UCLA PCI with Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite: an evaluation of health related quality of life in Japanese men with localized prostate cancer J Urol 178 2007 473
24. M.J. Resnick, D.A. Barocas, A.K. Morgans, and et al. The evolution of self-reported urinary and sexual dysfunction over the last two decades: implications for comparative effectiveness research Eur Urol 67 2014 1019
25. M. Menon, A. Shrivastava, A. Tewari, and et al. Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes J Urol 168 2002 945
26. Q.D. Trinh, A. Bjartell, S.J. Freedland, and et al. A systematic review of the volume-outcome relationship for radical prostatectomy Eur Urol 64 2013 786
27. J.U. Stolzenburg, M. Graefen, C. Kriegel, and et al. Effect of surgical approach on erectile function recovery following bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: an evaluation utilizing data from a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy multicenter trial of tadalafil versus placebo BJU Int 116 2015 241
28. T.A. Skolarus, R.L. Dunn, M.G. Sanda, and et al. Minimally important difference for the expanded prostate cancer index composite short form Urology 85 2015 101
29. R.C. Chen, J.A. Clark, and J.A. Talcott Individualizing quality-of-life outcomes reporting: how localized prostate cancer treatments affect patients with different levels of baseline urinary, bowel, and sexual function J Clin Oncol 27 2009 3916
30. G.I. Barbash, B. Friedman, S.A. Glied, and et al. Factors associated with adoption of robotic surgical technology in US hospitals and relationship to radical prostatectomy procedure volume Ann Surg 259 2014 1