scholarly journals Positive surgical margin rates during the robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy learning curve of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. E409-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony F. Adili ◽  
Julia Di Giovanni ◽  
Emma Kolesar ◽  
Nathan C. Wong ◽  
Jen Hoogenes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Margin Status ◽  
Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
The Mean ◽  
The Impact

Introduction: Since its introduction, robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) has gained widespread popularity, but is associated with a variable learning curve. Herein, we report the positive surgical margin (PSM) rates during the RARP learning curve of a single surgeon with significant previous laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) experience.Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study of the first 400 men with prostate cancer treated with RARP by a single surgeon (BS) with significant LRP experience. Our primary outcome was the impact of case timing in the learning curve on margin status. Our analysis was conducted by dividing the case numbers into quartiles (Q1‒Q4) and determining if a case falling into an earlier quartile had an impact on margin status relative to the most recent quartile (Q4).Results: The Q1 cases had an odds ratio for margin positivity of 1.74 compared to Q4 (p=0.1). Multivariate logistic regression did not demonstrate case number to be a significant predictor of PSM. The mean Q1 operative time was 207.4 minutes, decreasing to 179.2 by Q4 (p<0.0001). The mean Q1 estimated blood loss was 255.1 ml, decreasing to 213.6 by Q4 (p=0.0064). There was no change in length of hospitalization within the study period.Conclusions: Even when controlling for copredictors, a statistically significant learning curve for PSM rate of a surgeon with significant previous LRP experience was not detected during the first 400 RARP cases. We hypothesize that previous LRP experience may reduce the RARP PSM learning curve.

The role of bedside assistant during robot assisted radical prostatectomy: Is more experience better? Analysis on perioperative and clinical outcomes

2020 ◽  
pp. 039156032095108
Author(s):  
Mario Salvatore Mangano ◽  
Claudio Lamon ◽  
Francesco Beniamin ◽  
Alberto De Gobbi ◽  
Matteo Ciaccia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Bedside Assistant ◽  
The Impact

Objectives: To analyze the impact of the bedside assistant’s experience during RARP. It is believed that the outcome of robotic surgery during Robot Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) for prostate cancer depends not only on the console surgeon’s experience. Materials and Methods: All consecutive RARPs from January 2017 to March 2018 were sourced from a prospectively maintained database. All cases were performed by the same surgeon. He was supported by three bedside assistants: one with bedside and console experience, one only with relevant bedside experience, one basically inexperienced. The patient’s parameters analyzed: age, Body Mass Index (BMI), previous abdominal surgery, prostate volume (by TRUS), pre-operative PSA, bioptic grading. Surgical outcomes analyzed included skin-to-skin operative time and estimated blood loss; clinical outcomes included length of hospital stay and time to catheter removal; the oncological outcome was represented by positive surgical margin rate. Results: A total of 116 RARPs were identified: 38 RARPs were performed with the console experienced bedside assistant, 38 with the experienced one, 40 with the novice one. The variables were similar between the three groups. As far as outcomes are concerned, there were no statistically significant differences between the three bedside assistants in terms of operative time, estimated blood loss, length of stay, days of catheterization, positive surgical margin rate.

Does the day or season of operation predict biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy?

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16162-e16162
Author(s):  
A. L. Hirsh ◽  
D. J. Lee ◽  
G. Hruby ◽  
M. C. Benson ◽  
J. M. McKiernan
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Biochemical Recurrence ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Urologic Oncology ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Day Of The Week ◽  
The Mean

e16162 Background: Outcomes in hospital based medicine are associated with the experience and availability of the medical staff, as mortality and morbidity rates increase each summer with new medical graduates. Hospital staff members are thought to be more fatigued and less available towards the end of the week and on weekends. However it is not known if there is a difference of outcomes based on the season or day of the week. We sought to identify if different seasons or surgical days of the week can predict poor outcomes and biochemical recurrence (BCR) in radical prostatectomy (RP). Methods: A retrospective analysis of the Columbia Urologic Oncology database was performed. 1865 consecutive men underwent RP from 1991 to 2008 by three surgeons. Data was collected in an institutional review board approved registry, with median follow up of 36 months. BCR was defined as two consecutive PSA levels > 0.2 ng/ml. Stratified cox regression methods were used to model the relationship between surgeon, preoperative variables, season, day of the week, and BCR. Winter was defined as December through February, spring as March through May, summer as June through August, and fall as September through November. Results: The mean age of the men undergoing RP was 61.2 years (37–79), with a mean preoperative PSA of 8.12. 424 men (22.7%) had positive surgical margins, and the mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 1119cc. Patient age (p=0.68), preoperative PSA (p=0.32), EBL (p=0.51), and positive surgical margin rate (p=0.78) were not significantly different between each day. Men undergoing RP did not have different rates of BCR according to the day of the operation (p=0.58) or season (p=0.997). The particular season and day of the operation were not significantly associated with BCR, and were not independent predictors of BCR in a multivariable model after adjusting for preoperative PSA, Gleason sum, tumor stage, and surgeon. Conclusions: Patient surgical outcomes and BCR rates after RP are not associated with the particular season or day of the week of the procedure. These findings suggest that men undergoing RP do not need to be concerned about the particular season or day when scheduling the procedure. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

scholarly journals A novel “Three-port” trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Xu ◽  
Yi-ji Peng ◽  
Guo-Zhong Ma ◽  
Qian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Trocar Placement ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group B ◽  
Group D ◽  
Placement Technique

Abstract Background: To introduce a novel “three-port” trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 300 patients with PCa who received surgical treatment between November 2010 and June 2015 at our institution. They were divided into group A: three-port LRP, group B: conventional four-five port LRP, group C: open RP (ORP) and group D: robotic-assisted RP (RARP). A learning curve was analyzed by dividing patients of group A into the early and late stages.Results: All groups were comparable with regard to the preoperative characteristics except for the relatively smaller prostate volume in group A. The three-port LRP operations were performed successfully with only 8 cases conversion to the conventional LRP. None of any severe complications or conversion to ORP occurred. In group A, the mean operative time (OT) duration was 113.8min, the mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 94.2ml, the mean drainage days was 4.0d, the mean hospitalization was 5.1d, and 27.8% of the prostate specimen margins (PSM) were positive. The differences of OT, EBL, drainage days, hospitalization and transfusion in group A were statistically significant among the majority of the other groups (p<0.05). After undergoing the early stages of a learning curve analysis in three-port LRP, the EBL was obviously decreased.Conclusions: Three-port LRP is a novel technique that exhibits superior intraoperative advantages to the conventional LRP. Due to its less OT, EBL, drainage days, hospitalization and transfusion with a shorter learning curve, it should be recommended and popularized in the clinical practice!

scholarly journals Achieving proficiency with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: Laparoscopic-trained versus robotics-trained surgeons

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 711
Author(s):  
Allen Chang ◽  
Armen Derboghossians ◽  
Jennifer Kaswick ◽  
Brian Kim ◽  
Howard Jung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Laparoscopic Group ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Single Institution ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Kaiser Permanente ◽  
Surgical Tool ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss

Background: Initiating a robotics program is complex, in regards to achieving favourable outcomes, effectively utilizing an expensive surgical tool, and granting console privileges to surgeons. We report the implementation of a community-based robotics program among minimally-invasive surgery (MIS) urologists with and without formal robotics training.Methods: From August 2008 to December 2010 at Kaiser Permanente Southern California, 2 groups of urologists performing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) were followed since the time of robot acquisition at a single institution. The robotics group included 4 surgeons with formal robotics training and the laparoscopic group with another 4 surgeons who were robot-naïve, but skilled in laparoscopy. The laparoscopic group underwent an initial 7-day mentorship period. Surgical proficiency was measured by various operative and pathological outcome variables. Data were evaluated using comparative statistics and multivariate analysis.Results: A total of 420 and 549 RARPs were performed by the robotics and laparoscopic groups, respectively. Operative times were longer in the laparoscopic group (p = 0.002), but estimated blood loss was similar. The robotics group had a significantly better overall positive surgical margin rate of 19.9% compared to the laparoscopic group (27.8%) (p = 0.005). Both groups showed improvements in operative and pathological parameters as they accrued experience, and achieved similar results towards the end of the study.Conclusions: Robot-naïve laparoscopic surgeons may achieve similar outcomes to robotic surgeons relatively early after a graduated mentorship period. This study may apply to a community-based practice in which multiple urologists with varied training backgrounds are granted robot privileges.

scholarly journals A Novel “Three-Port” Trocar Placement Technique for Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Xu ◽  
Hai-feng Song ◽  
Cheng Luo ◽  
Qian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Trocar Placement ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group B ◽  
Group D ◽  
Placement Technique

Abstract Background: To introduce a novel “three-port” trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 300 patients with PCa who received surgical treatment between November 2010 and June 2015 at our institution. They were divided into group A: three-port LRP, group B: conventional four-five port LRP, group C: open RP (ORP) and group D: robotic-assisted RP (RARP). A learning curve was analyzed by dividing patients of group A into the early and late stages.Results: All groups were comparable with regard to the preoperative characteristics except for the relatively smaller prostate volume in group A. The three-port LRP operations were performed successfully with only 8 cases conversion to the conventional LRP. None of any severe complications or conversion to ORP occurred. In group A, the mean operative time (OT) duration was 113.8 min, the mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 94.2 ml, the mean drainage days was 4.0d, the mean hospitalization was 5.1 d, and 27.8% of the prostate specimen margins (PSM) were positive. The differences of OT, EBL, drainage days, hospitalization and transfusion in group A were statistically significant among the majority of the other groups (p<0.05). After undergoing the early stages of a learning curve analysis in three-port LRP, the EBL was obviously decreased.Conclusions: Three-port LRP is a novel technique that exhibits superior intraoperative advantages to the conventional LRP. Due to its less OT, EBL, drainage days, hospitalization and transfusion with a shorter learning curve, it should be recommended and popularized in the clinical practice!

Patients with prior TURP undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy have higher positive surgical margin rates

2008 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 213-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lance Hampton ◽  
Rebecca A. Nelson ◽  
Roger Satterthwaite ◽  
Timothy Wilson ◽  
Laura Crocitto
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robot Assisted

scholarly journals A novel “three-port” trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Xu ◽  
Yi-ji Peng ◽  
Guo-zhong Ma ◽  
Qian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Trocar Placement ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Group B ◽  
Group D ◽  
Placement Technique

Abstract Background To introduce a novel “three-port” trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 300 patients with PCa who received surgical treatment between November 2010 and June 2015 at our institution. They were divided into group A, three-port LRP; group B, conventional four-five-port LRP; group C, open RP (ORP); and group D, robotic-assisted RP (RARP). A learning curve was analyzed by dividing patients of group A into the early and late stages. Results All groups were comparable with regard to the preoperative characteristics except for the relatively smaller prostate volume in group A. The three-port LRP operations were performed successfully with only 8 cases of conversion to the conventional LRP. None of any severe complications or conversion to ORP occurred. In group A, the mean operative time (OT) duration was 113.8 min, the mean estimated blood loss (EBL) was 94.2 ml, the mean drainage days was 4.0 days, the mean hospitalization was 5.1 days, and 27.8% of the prostate specimen margins (PSM) were positive. The differences of OT, EBL, drainage days, hospitalization, and transfusion in group A were statistically significant among the majority of the other groups (p < 0.05). After undergoing the early stages of a learning curve analysis in three-port LRP, the EBL was obviously decreased. Conclusions Three-port LRP is a novel technique that exhibits superior intraoperative advantages to the conventional LRP. Due to its less OT, EBL, drainage days, hospitalization, and transfusion with a shorter learning curve, it should be recommended and popularized in the clinical practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document