• Quoc-Dien Trinh, Jesse Sammon, Maxine Sun, Praful Ravi, Khurshid R Ghani, Marco Bianchi, Wooju Jeong, Shahrokh F Shariat, Jens Hansen, Jan Schmitges, Claudio Jeldres, Craig G Rogers, James O Peabody, Francesco Montorsi, Mani Menon, and Pierre I Karakiewicz.
• Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, MI 48202, USA. trinh.qd@gmail.com
• Eur. Urol. 2012 Apr 1;61(4):679-85.

BackgroundPrior to the introduction and dissemination of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), population-based studies comparing open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) found no clinically significant difference in perioperative complication rates.ObjectiveAssess the rate of RARP utilization and reexamine the difference in perioperative complication rates between RARP and ORP in light of RARP's supplanting laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) as the most common MIRP technique.Design, Setting, And ParticipantsAs of October 2008, a robot-assisted modifier was introduced to denote robot-assisted procedures. Relying on the Nationwide Inpatient Sample between October 2008 and December 2009, patients treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) were identified. The robot-assisted modifier (17.4x) was used to identify RARP (n=11 889). Patients with the minimally invasive modifier code (54.21) without the robot-assisted modifier were classified as having undergone LRP and were removed from further analyses. The remainder were classified as ORP patients (n=7389).InterventionAll patients underwent RARP or ORP.MeasurementsWe compared the rates of blood transfusions, intraoperative and postoperative complications, prolonged length of stay (pLOS), and in-hospital mortality. Multivariable logistic regression analyses of propensity score-matched populations, fitted with general estimation equations for clustering among hospitals, further adjusted for confounding factors.Results And LimitationsOf 19 462 RPs, 61.1% were RARPs, 38.0% were ORPs, and 0.9% were LRPs. In multivariable analyses of propensity score-matched populations, patients undergoing RARP were less likely to receive a blood transfusion (odds ratio [OR]: 0.34; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.28-0.40), to experience an intraoperative complication (OR: 0.47; 95% CI, 0.31-0.71) or a postoperative complication (OR: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-0.96), and to experience a pLOS (OR: 0.28; 95% CI, 0.26-0.30). Limitations of this study include lack of adjustment for tumor characteristics, surgeon volume, learning curve effect, and longitudinal follow-up.ConclusionsRARP has supplanted ORP as the most common surgical approach for RP. Moreover, we demonstrate superior adjusted perioperative outcomes after RARP in virtually all examined outcomes.Copyright © 2011 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

36 keywords...

hide…