4.6 Review

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Reporting Oncologic Outcome After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

期刊

EUROPEAN UROLOGY
卷 62, 期 3, 页码 382-404

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.047

关键词

Prostatic neoplasms; Prostatectomy; Laparoscopy; Robotics

资金

  1. Astellas
  2. Eli Lilly
  3. Pierre Fabre
  4. Provenge
  5. Recordati Int.
  6. Takeda
  7. Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context: Despite the large diffusion of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), literature and data on the oncologic outcome of RARP are limited. Objective: Evaluate lymph node yield, positive surgical margins (PSMs), use of adjuvant therapy, and biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival following RARP and perform a cumulative analysis of all studies comparing the oncologic outcomes of RARP and retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Evidence acquisition: A systematic review of the literature was performed in August 2011, searching Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. A free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy was applied. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publications dating from January 1, 2008. A cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v. 4.2 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) and Stata 11.0 SE software (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Evidence synthesis: We retrieved 79 papers evaluating oncologic outcomes following RARP. The mean PSM rate was 15% in all comers and 9% in pathologically localized cancers, with some tumor characteristics being the most relevant predictors of PSMs. Several surgeon-related characteristics or procedure-related issues may play a major role in PSM rates. With regard to BCR, the very few papers with a follow-up duration >5 yr demonstrated 7-yr BCR-free survival estimates of approximately 80%. Finally, all the cumulative analyses comparing RARP with RRP and comparing RARP with LRP demonstrated similar overall PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: odds ratio [OR]: 1.21; p = 0.19; RARP vs LRP: OR: 1.12; p = 0.47), pT2 PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: OR: 1.25; p = 0.31; RARP vs LRP: OR: 0.99; p = 0.97), and BCR-free survival estimates (RARP vs RRP: hazard ratio [ HR]: 0.9; p = 0.526; RARP vs LRP: HR: 0.5; p = 0.141), regardless of the surgical approach. Conclusions: PSM rates are similar following RARP, RRP, and LRP. The few data available on BCR from high-volume centers are promising, but definitive comparisons with RRP or LRP are not currently possible. Finally, significant data on cancer-specific mortality are not currently available. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据