A case-mix-adjusted comparison of early oncological outcomes of open and robotic prostatectomy performed by experienced high volume surgeons

Departments of Urology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
BJU International (Impact Factor: 3.53). 02/2013; 111(2):184-5. DOI: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11643.x
Source: PubMed
3 Reads
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since the first procedure performed in 2000, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has been rapidly gaining increasing acceptance from both urologists and patients. Today, RARP is the dominant treatment option for localised prostate cancer (PCa) in the United States, despite the absence of any prospective randomised trial comparing RARP with other procedures. Robotic systems have been introduced in an attempt to reduce the difficulty involved in performing complex laparoscopic procedures and the related steep learning curve. The recognised advantages of this kind of minimally invasive surgery are three-dimensional (3D) vision, ten-fold magnification, Endowrist technology with seven degrees of freedom, and tremor filtration. In this article, we examine this technique and report its functional (in terms of urinary continence and potency) and oncologic results. We also evaluate the potential advantages of RARP in comparison with open and laparoscopic procedures.
    ecancermedicalscience 09/2013; 7(1):355. DOI:10.3332/ecancer.2013.355 · 1.20 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Robot-assisted surgery is gaining momentum as a new trend in minimally invasive surgery. With limited evidence supporting its use in place of the far less expensive conventional laparoscopic surgery, it has been suggested that marketing pressure is partly responsible for its widespread adoption. The impact of phrases that promote the novelty of robot-assisted surgery on patient decision making has not been investigated. We conducted a discrete choice experiment to elicit preference of partial colectomy technique for a hypothetical diagnosis of colon cancer. A convenience sample of 38 participants in an ambulatory general surgery clinic consented to participate. Each participant made 2 treatment decisions between robot-assisted surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery, with robot-assisted surgery described as "innovative" and "state-of-the-art" in one of the decisions (marketing frame), and by a disclosure of the uncertainty of available evidence in the other (evidence-based frame). The magnitude of the framing effect was large with 12 of 38 subjects (31.6%, P = .005) selecting robot-assisted surgery in the marketing frame and not the evidence-based frame. This is the first study to our knowledge to demonstrate that words that highlight novelty have an important influence on patient preference for robot-assisted surgery and that use of more neutral language can mitigate this effect.
    Surgical Innovation 06/2014; 22(1). DOI:10.1177/1553350614537562 · 1.46 Impact Factor