Safety and feasibility of outpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

作者: Pooya Banapour , Peter Elliott , Ramzi Jabaji , Ashish Parekh , Apurba Pathak

DOI: 10.1007/S11701-018-0848-8

关键词:

摘要: Since its inception, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has developed into a familiar surgical modality with improved perioperative outcomes including decreased hospital stay for localized prostate cancer patients. Experience outpatient RARP been reported as early 2010. In this study, we evaluate the safety and feasibility of by comparing between patients undergoing to discharged on day following surgery. This is single-institution retrospective cohort study. Patients disease who underwent without pelvic lymph node dissection from September 2017 January 2018 were included. T tests Chi-squared analysis used compare demographic characteristics same surgery (outpatient RARP) after (inpatient RARP). Of 51 included in 26 while 25 inpatient RARP. There was no significant difference mean age (61.4 vs 65.8 years, p = 0.05), BMI (27.1 28.3 kg/m2, p = 0.35), ethnicity, tobacco use (8 15%, p = 0.41), PSA (8.7 8.4 ng/dL, p = 0.77), biopsy Gleason score distribution, size (51.8 57.7 cc, p = 0.26) or preoperative hemoglobin (14.3 13.4 g/dL, p = 0.06), respectively. operative time (95.3 101 min, p = 0.16), EBL (52.8 66.5 cc, p = 0.08), postoperative change (− 1 − 1.1 g/dL, p = 0.62), pathologic stage distribution complication rate (4 8%, p = 0.58) RARP, Outpatient offers similar when compared We advocate safe feasible alternative appropriately selected Furthermore, introduce an model that can be applied other institutions seeking implement

参考文章(9)
Aaron D Martin, Rafael N Nunez, Jack R Andrews, George L Martin, Paul E Andrews, Erik P Castle, None, Outpatient Prostatectomy: Too Much Too Soon or Just What the Patient Ordered Urology. ,vol. 75, pp. 421- 424 ,(2010) , 10.1016/J.UROLOGY.2009.08.085
Nicole R. Guinn, Bob W. Broomer, William White, William Richardson, Steven E. Hill, Comparison of visually estimated blood loss with direct hemoglobin measurement in multilevel spine surgery. Transfusion. ,vol. 53, pp. 2790- 2794 ,(2013) , 10.1111/TRF.12119
Andre K Berger, Sameer Chopra, Mihir M Desai, Monish Aron, Inderbir S Gill, None, Outpatient Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: Matched-Pair Comparison with Inpatient Surgery. Journal of Endourology. ,(2016) , 10.1089/END.2016.0135
Thomas Seisen, Alexander P Cole, Maxine Sun, Adam S Kibel, Quoc-Dien Trinh, Assessing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. The Lancet. ,vol. 389, pp. 799- 799 ,(2017) , 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30511-1
A. Lopez-Picado, A. Albinarrate, Borja Barrachina, Determination of Perioperative Blood Loss: Accuracy or Approximation? Anesthesia & Analgesia. ,vol. 125, pp. 280- 286 ,(2017) , 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001992
Hamid Abboudi, Patrick Doyle, Mathias Winkler, Day case laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Archivio Italiano di Urologia e Andrologia. ,vol. 89, pp. 182- 185 ,(2017) , 10.4081/AIUA.2017.3.182
Lorenzo Giuseppe Luciani, Daniele Mattevi, William Mantovani, Tommaso Cai, Stefano Chiodini, Valentino Vattovani, Marco Puglisi, Daniele Tiscione, Umberto Anceschi, Gianni Malossini, Retropubic, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Analysis of the Surgical Outcomes in a Single Regional Center. Current Urology. ,vol. 11, pp. 36- 41 ,(2017) , 10.1159/000447192
Abbas Basiri, Jean JMCH de la Rosette, Shahin Tabatabaei, Henry H. Woo, M. Pilar Laguna, Hamidreza Shemshaki, Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner? World Journal of Urology. ,vol. 36, pp. 609- 621 ,(2018) , 10.1007/S00345-018-2174-1