Patients Regret Their Choice of Therapy Significantly Less Frequently after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy as Opposed to Open Radical Prostatectomy: Patient-Reported Results of the Multicenter Cross-Sectional IMPROVE Study
- PMID: 36358775
- PMCID: PMC9654391
- DOI: 10.3390/cancers14215356
Patients Regret Their Choice of Therapy Significantly Less Frequently after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy as Opposed to Open Radical Prostatectomy: Patient-Reported Results of the Multicenter Cross-Sectional IMPROVE Study
Abstract
Patient’s regret (PatR) concerning the choice of therapy represents a crucial endpoint for treatment evaluation after radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCA). This study aims to compare PatR following robot-assisted (RARP) and open surgical approach (ORP). A survey comprising perioperative-functional criteria was sent to 1000 patients in 20 German centers at a median of 15 months after RP. Surgery-related items were collected from participating centers. To calculate PatR differences between approaches, a multivariate regressive base model (MVBM) was established incorporating surgical approach and demographic, center-specific, and tumor-specific criteria not primarily affected by surgical approach. An extended model (MVEM) was further adjusted by variables potentially affected by surgical approach. PatR was based on five validated questions ranging 0−100 (cutoff >15 defined as critical PatR). The response rate was 75.0%. After exclusion of patients with laparoscopic RP or stage M1b/c, the study cohort comprised 277/365 ORP/RARP patients. ORP/RARP patients had a median PatR of 15/10 (p < 0.001) and 46.2%/28.1% had a PatR >15, respectively (p < 0.001). Based on the MVBM, RARP patients showed PatR >15 relative 46.8% less frequently (p < 0.001). Consensual decision making regarding surgical approach independently reduced PatR. With the MVEM, the independent impact of both surgical approach and of consensual decision making was confirmed. This study involving centers of different care levels showed significantly lower PatR following RARP.
Keywords: characterization of patients; clinical decision-making; decision regret; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy; survey.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Community-based Outcomes of Open versus Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy.Eur Urol. 2018 Feb;73(2):215-223. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.04.027. Epub 2017 May 9. Eur Urol. 2018. PMID: 28499617
-
Patterns-of-care and health economic analysis of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the Australian public health system.BJU Int. 2016 Jun;117(6):930-9. doi: 10.1111/bju.13317. Epub 2015 Oct 1. BJU Int. 2016. PMID: 26350758
-
Comparison of oncological and health-related quality of life outcomes between open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer - findings from the population-based Victorian Prostate Cancer Registry.BJU Int. 2016 Oct;118(4):563-9. doi: 10.1111/bju.13380. Epub 2015 Dec 19. BJU Int. 2016. PMID: 26573954
-
Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy vs. Open Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Indian J Surg. 2015 Dec;77(Suppl 3):1326-33. doi: 10.1007/s12262-014-1170-y. Epub 2014 Sep 24. Indian J Surg. 2015. PMID: 27011560 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Robot-assisted and laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer: perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes: A Systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 May;98(22):e15770. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000015770. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019. PMID: 31145297 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Patient's Desire and Real Availability Concerning Supportive Measures Accompanying Radical Prostatectomy: Differences between Certified Prostate Cancer Centers and Non-Certified Centers Based on Patient-Reported Outcomes within the Cross-Sectional Study Improve.Cancers (Basel). 2023 May 19;15(10):2830. doi: 10.3390/cancers15102830. Cancers (Basel). 2023. PMID: 37345167 Free PMC article.
-
[Prehabilitation prior to radical prostatectomy : A useful concept?].Urologie. 2023 Oct;62(10):1041-1047. doi: 10.1007/s00120-023-02173-7. Epub 2023 Aug 24. Urologie. 2023. PMID: 37620505 Review. German.
-
Incorporating VR-RENDER Fusion Software in Robot-Assisted Partial Prostatectomy: The First Case Report.Curr Oncol. 2023 Jan 31;30(2):1699-1707. doi: 10.3390/curroncol30020131. Curr Oncol. 2023. PMID: 36826092 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Mottet N., van den Bergh R.C.N., Briers E., Van den Broeck T., Cumberbatch M.G., De Santis M., Fanti S., Fossati N., Gandaglia G., Gillessen S., et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG Guidelines on Prostate Cancer-2020 Update. Part 1: Screening, Diagnosis, and Local Treatment with Curative Intent. Eur. Urol. 2021;79:243–262. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Eastham J.A., Auffenberg G.B., Barocas D.A., Chou R., Crispino T., Davis J.W., Eggener S., Horwitz E.M., Kane C.J., Kirkby E., et al. Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, Part I: Introduction, Risk Assessment, Staging, and Risk-Based Management. J. Urol. 2022;208:10–18. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002757. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Eastham J.A., Auffenberg G.B., Barocas D.A., Chou R., Crispino T., Davis J.W., Eggener S., Horwitz E.M., Kane C.J., Kirkby E., et al. Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO Guideline, Part II: Principles of Active Surveillance, Principles of Surgery, and Follow-Up. J. Urol. 2022;208:19–25. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000002758. - DOI - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources