Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2013 Feb;111(2):206-12.
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11638.x.

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

Affiliations
Comparative Study

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

Jonathan L Silberstein et al. BJU Int. 2013 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: To compare early oncological outcomes of robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) performed by high volume surgeons in a contemporary cohort.

Methods: We reviewed patients who underwent radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer by high volume surgeons performing RALP or ORP. Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as PSA ≥ 0.1 ng/mL or PSA ≥ 0.05 ng/mL with receipt of additional therapy. A Cox regression model was used to evaluate the association between surgical approach and BCR using a predictive model (nomogram) based on preoperative stage, grade, volume of disease and PSA. To explore the impact of differences between surgeons, multivariable analyses were repeated using surgeon in place of approach.

Results: Of 1454 patients included, 961 (66%) underwent ORP and 493 (34%) RALP and there were no important differences in cancer characteristics by group. Overall, 68% of patients met National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for intermediate or high risk disease and 9% had lymph node involvement. Positive margin rates were 15% for both open and robotic groups. In a multivariate model adjusting for preoperative risk there was no significant difference in BCR rates for RALP compared with ORP (hazard ratio 0.88; 95% CI 0.56-1.39; P = 0.6). The interaction term between nomogram risk and procedure type was not statistically significant. Using NCCN risk group as the covariate in a Cox model gave similar results (hazard ratio 0.74; 95% CI 0.47-1.17; P = 0.2). The interaction term between NCCN risk and procedure type was also non-significant. Differences in BCR rates between techniques (4.1% vs 3.3% adjusted risk at 2 years) were smaller than those between surgeons (2.5% to 4.8% adjusted risk at 2 years).

Conclusions: In this relatively high risk cohort of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy we found no evidence to suggest that ORP resulted in better early oncological outcomes then RALP. Oncological outcome after radical prostatectomy may be driven more by surgeon factors than surgical approach.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None declared.

Figures

FIG. 1
FIG. 1
Unadjusted cumulative incidence of biochemical recurrence per procedure type: solid line, ORP; dashed line, RALP.
FIG. 2
FIG. 2
Two-year biochemical-recurrence-free survival vs nomogram risk at 5 years: solid line, ORP; dashed line, RALP. The density plot shows the distribution of nomogram risk in our study cohort.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lowrance WT, Eastham JA, Savage C, et al. Contemporary open and robotic radical prostatectomy practice patterns among urologists in the United States. J Urol. 2012;187:2087–2093. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Walsh PC. Anatomic radical prostatectomy: evolution of the surgical technique. J Urol. 1998;160:2418–2424. - PubMed
    1. Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody J. Vattikuti Institute prostatectomy: technique. J Urol. 2003;169:2289–2292. - PubMed
    1. Cagiannos I, Karakiewicz P, Eastham JA, et al. A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer. J Urol. 2003;170:1798–1803. - PubMed
    1. Touijer K, Rabbani F, Otero JR, et al. Standard versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer in patients with a predicted probability of nodal metastasis greater than 1% J Urol. 2007;178:120–124. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Substances