4.6 Article

Patterns of Care for Radical Prostatectomy in the United States From 2003 to 2005

Journal

JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Volume 180, Issue 5, Pages 1969-1974

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.07.054

Keywords

prostate; prostatectomy; surgical procedures, minimally invasive; outcome assessment (health care); complications

Funding

  1. Lance Armstrong Young Investigator Award
  2. Dana Farber Harvard Cancer Center Career Development Award (JCH)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The demand for minimally invasive radical prostatectomy is increasing, although population based outcomes remain unclear. We assessed use and outcomes in American men undergoing radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: We identified 14,727 men undergoing minimally invasive, perineal and retropubic radical prostatectomy during 2003 to 2005 using nationally representative, employer based administrative data. We assessed the association between surgical approach and outcomes, adjusting for age, race, comorbidity and geographic region. Results: Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy use increased from 5.4% to 24.4%, while conversion to open surgery decreased from 28.6% to 4.5% in the 3-year study. Men undergoing minimally invasive and perineal radical prostatectomy vs retropubic radical prostatectomy experienced fewer 30-day complications (14.2% and 14.9% vs 17.5%, p = 0.001), blood transfusions (2.2% and 3.6% vs 9.1%, p < 0.001) and anastomotic strictures (6.8% and 8.5% vs 12.9%, p < 0.001), and shorter median length of stay (I and 2 days, respectively, vs 4, p < 0.001). On adjusted analysis minimally invasive vs retropubic radical prostatectomy was associated with fewer 30-day complications (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.66, 0.92), transfusions (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.16, 0.34) and anastomotic strictures (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.40, 0.62), and shorter length of stay (parameter estimate -0.53, 95% CI -0.58, -0.49). Similarly perineal vs retropubic radical prostatectomy was associated with fewer transfusions (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31, 0.82) and anastomotic strictures (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47, 0.90), and shorter length of stay (parameter estimate -0.53, 95% CI -0.42, -0.29). Conclusions: While the use of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy surged, men undergoing minimally invasive vs perineal radical prostatectomy experienced a lower risk of 30-day complications, blood transfusions and anastomotic strictures, and a shorter length of stay. Furthermore, perineal vs retropubic radical prostatectomy was also associated with relatively favorable outcomes. Further study is needed to assess continence, potency and cancer control.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available