Article

Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA

Division of Urologic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, 45 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 30.39). 10/2009; 302(14):1557-64. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.1451
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) has diffused rapidly despite limited data on outcomes and greater costs compared with open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP).
To determine the comparative effectiveness of MIRP vs RRP.
Population-based observational cohort study using US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare linked data from 2003 through 2007. We identified men with prostate cancer who underwent MIRP (n = 1938) vs RRP (n = 6899).
We compared postoperative 30-day complications, anastomotic stricture 31 to 365 days postoperatively, long-term incontinence and erectile dysfunction more than 18 months postoperatively, and postoperative use of additional cancer therapies, a surrogate for cancer control.
Among men undergoing prostatectomy, use of MIRP increased from 9.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.1%-10.5%) in 2003 to 43.2% (95% CI, 39.6%-46.9%) in 2006-2007. Men undergoing MIRP vs RRP were more likely to be recorded as Asian (6.1% vs 3.2%), less likely to be recorded as black (6.2% vs 7.8%) or Hispanic (5.6% vs 7.9%), and more likely to live in areas with at least 90% high school graduation rates (50.2% vs 41.0%) and with median incomes of at least $60,000 (35.8% vs 21.5%) (all P < .001). In propensity score-adjusted analyses, MIRP vs RRP was associated with shorter length of stay (median, 2.0 vs 3.0 days; P<.001) and lower rates of blood transfusions (2.7% vs 20.8%; P < .001), postoperative respiratory complications (4.3% vs 6.6%; P = .004), miscellaneous surgical complications (4.3% vs 5.6%; P = .03), and anastomotic stricture (5.8% vs 14.0%; P < .001). However, MIRP vs RRP was associated with an increased risk of genitourinary complications (4.7% vs 2.1%; P = .001) and diagnoses of incontinence (15.9 vs 12.2 per 100 person-years; P = .02) and erectile dysfunction (26.8 vs 19.2 per 100 person-years; P = .009). Rates of use of additional cancer therapies did not differ by surgical procedure (8.2 vs 6.9 per 100 person-years; P = .35).
Men undergoing MIRP vs RRP experienced shorter length of stay, fewer respiratory and miscellaneous surgical complications and strictures, and similar postoperative use of additional cancer therapies but experienced more genitourinary complications, incontinence, and erectile dysfunction.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Jim C Hu, Jan 21, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
167 Views
 · 
41 Downloads
  • Source
    • "There has been a 20% yearly increase rate in the number of medical robots sold [3]. The use of robots in medical procedures has been shown to result in better surgical outcomes and faster recovery, thus enhancing the delivery of medical services to the patients [16]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Teleoperated robots are playing an increasingly important role in military actions and medical services. In the future, remotely operated surgical robots will likely be used in more scenarios such as battlefields and emergency response. But rapidly growing applications of teleoperated surgery raise the question; what if the computer systems for these robots are attacked, taken over and even turned into weapons? Our work seeks to answer this question by systematically analyzing possible cyber security attacks against Raven II, an advanced teleoperated robotic surgery system. We identify a slew of possible cyber security threats, and experimentally evaluate their scopes and impacts. We demonstrate the ability to maliciously control a wide range of robots functions, and even to completely ignore or override command inputs from the surgeon. We further find that it is possible to abuse the robot's existing emergency stop (E-stop) mechanism to execute efficient (single packet) attacks. We then consider steps to mitigate these identified attacks, and experimentally evaluate the feasibility of applying the existing security solutions against these threats. The broader goal of our paper, however, is to raise awareness and increase understanding of these emerging threats. We anticipate that the majority of attacks against telerobotic surgery will also be relevant to other teleoperated robotic and co-robotic systems.
  • Source
    • "Third, studies have not found inferior PSA outcomes when minimally invasive techniques such as robotic or laparoscopic RP as compared to open RP are performed. [34–36]. Therefore, these data using open RP should apply to patients undergoing robotic or laparoscopic RP. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose. We investigated whether NS-RP increased risk of PSA failure and whether PSA should be included as a selection criterion for NS. Methods. We evaluated 357 consecutive men with screen-detected PC who underwent open RP without adjuvant radiotherapy between 9/11/2001 and 12/30/2008. Criteria for NS included Gleason score ≤3 + 4, percentage of positive biopsies (PPB) ≤50%, percentage of core involvement ≤50%, nonapical location, no perineural invasion, and no palpable disease on pre- or intraoperative exam but did not include a PSA threshold. Cox multivariable regression assessed whether increasing PSA or unilateral- or bilateral-NS versus non-NS-RP was associated with PSA failure adjusting for prognostic factors. Results. After a median follow-up of 3.96 years, 34 men sustained PSA failure (9.5%). Increasing PSA was significantly associated with increased risk of PSA failure in the interaction model (adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 1.09 [95% CI: 1.03-1.16]; P = 0.005), whereas unilateral (AHR: 1.24 [95% CI: 0.36-4.34]; P = 0.73) or bilateral NS (AHR: 0.41 [95% CI: 0.06-2.59]; P = 0.34) versus non-NS RP was not. Conclusion. NS-RP in a screened cohort did not increase risk of PSA failure using NS criteria not including PSA.
    04/2014; 2014:395078. DOI:10.1155/2014/395078
    • "Some of the purported benefits of robotic-assistance include improved visualization, repeatable dexterous movements and favorable ergonomics for the surgeon. Reports from large series have demonstrated low complication rates, decreased estimated blood loss (EBL) and shorter lengths of hospital stay in comparison to open radical retropubic prostatectomy.[345] Furthermore, increased case volumes and surgeon experience have also been shown to improve perioperative outcomes with RARP.[6789] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Since its introduction, there have been many refinements in the technique and implementation of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). However, it is unclear whether operative outcomes are influenced by surgical case order. We evaluated the effect of case order on perioperative outcomes for RARP within a large health maintenance organization. We conducted a retrospective review of RARP cases performed at our institution from September 2008 to December 2010 using a single robotic platform. Case order was determined from surgical schedules each day and surgeries were grouped into 1(st), 2(nd) and 3(rd) round cases. Fourth round cases (n = 1) were excluded from analysis. We compared clinicopathological variables including operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), surgical margin rates and complication rates between groups. Of the 1018 RARP cases in this cohort, 476 (47%) were performed as 1(st) round cases, 398 (39%) 2(nd) round cases and 144 (14%) 3(rd) round cases by a total of 18 surgeons. Mean operative time was shorter as cases were performed later in the day (213 min vs. 209 min vs. 180 min, P < 0.0001) and similarly, EBL also decreased with surgical order (136 mL vs. 134 mL vs. 103 mL, P = 0.01). Transfusion rates, surgical margin rates and complication rates did not significantly differ between groups. Patients undergoing RARP later in the day were much more likely to have a hospital stay of 2 or more days than earlier cases (10% vs. 11% vs. 32%, P = 0.01). Surgical case order may influence perioperative outcomes for RARP with decreased operative times and increased length of hospital stay associated with later cases. These findings indicate that select perioperative factors may improve with ascending case order as the surgical team "warms up" during the day. In addition, 3(rd) round cases can increase hospital costs associated with increased lengths of hospital stay. Knowledge of these differences may assist in surgical planning to improve outcomes and limit costs.
    Urology Annals 04/2014; 6(2):142-6. DOI:10.4103/0974-7796.130645
Show more