Comparison of the effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies based on complication rates: a retrospective observational study with administrative data from Switzerland.

IF 1.7 3区 医学 Q3 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Christine von Ahlen, Alexander Geissler, Justus Vogel
{"title":"Comparison of the effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies based on complication rates: a retrospective observational study with administrative data from Switzerland.","authors":"Christine von Ahlen, Alexander Geissler, Justus Vogel","doi":"10.1186/s12894-024-01597-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Radical prostatectomies can be performed using open retropubic, laparoscopic, or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. The literature shows that short-term outcomes (in particular, inpatient complications) differ depending on the type of procedure. To date, these differences have only been examined and confirmed in isolated cases based on national routine data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The data was based on the Swiss Medical Statistics from 2016 to 2018 from a national survey of administrative data from all Swiss hospitals. Cases with the coded main diseases neoplasm of the prostate (ICD C61) and the main treatments of laparoscopic (CHOP 60.5X.20) or retropubic (CHOP 60.5X.30) radical prostatectomies were included, resulting in a total sample size of 8,593 cases.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A procedure-related complication occurred in 998 cases (11.6%). By surgical procedure, complication rates were 10.1% for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy 9.0% for conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and 17.1% for open retropubic radical prostatectomy (p < 0.001). Conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies had a significantly lower risk of complications than retropubic procedures. Moreover, the risk of a procedure-related complication was almost twice as high in cases operated on retropubically; however, no significant difference was found between conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic cases.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>The use of a surgical robot showed no advantages in radical prostatectomies regarding procedure-related during the hospital stay. However, both conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopically operated radical prostatectomies show better results than open retropubic procedures. Further studies on the long-term course of patients based on claims data are needed to confirm the inherent benefits of surgical robots in tandem with them being increasingly employed in hospitals.</p>","PeriodicalId":9285,"journal":{"name":"BMC Urology","volume":"24 1","pages":"215"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11457412/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-024-01597-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Radical prostatectomies can be performed using open retropubic, laparoscopic, or robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery. The literature shows that short-term outcomes (in particular, inpatient complications) differ depending on the type of procedure. To date, these differences have only been examined and confirmed in isolated cases based on national routine data.

Methods: The data was based on the Swiss Medical Statistics from 2016 to 2018 from a national survey of administrative data from all Swiss hospitals. Cases with the coded main diseases neoplasm of the prostate (ICD C61) and the main treatments of laparoscopic (CHOP 60.5X.20) or retropubic (CHOP 60.5X.30) radical prostatectomies were included, resulting in a total sample size of 8,593 cases.

Results: A procedure-related complication occurred in 998 cases (11.6%). By surgical procedure, complication rates were 10.1% for robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy 9.0% for conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and 17.1% for open retropubic radical prostatectomy (p < 0.001). Conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies had a significantly lower risk of complications than retropubic procedures. Moreover, the risk of a procedure-related complication was almost twice as high in cases operated on retropubically; however, no significant difference was found between conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopic cases.

Discussion: The use of a surgical robot showed no advantages in radical prostatectomies regarding procedure-related during the hospital stay. However, both conventional and robotic-assisted laparoscopically operated radical prostatectomies show better results than open retropubic procedures. Further studies on the long-term course of patients based on claims data are needed to confirm the inherent benefits of surgical robots in tandem with them being increasingly employed in hospitals.

根据并发症发生率比较开腹、腹腔镜和机器人辅助前列腺癌根治术的效果:一项利用瑞士行政数据进行的回顾性观察研究。
背景:根治性前列腺切除术可采用开放式耻骨后手术、腹腔镜手术或机器人辅助腹腔镜手术。文献显示,不同类型手术的短期疗效(尤其是住院并发症)有所不同。迄今为止,这些差异仅在基于国家常规数据的个别病例中得到研究和证实:数据基于 2016 年至 2018 年的瑞士医疗统计数据,该数据来自对瑞士所有医院行政数据的全国性调查。纳入的病例编码主要疾病为前列腺肿瘤(ICD C61),主要治疗方式为腹腔镜(CHOP 60.5X.20)或耻骨后(CHOP 60.5X.30)前列腺癌根治术,样本量共计8593例:结果:998例(11.6%)发生了与手术相关的并发症。按手术方式划分,机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术的并发症发生率为10.1%,传统腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术为9.0%,开放式耻骨后前列腺癌根治术为17.1%(P 讨论):在根治性前列腺切除术中,使用手术机器人在住院期间的手术相关方面没有优势。不过,传统和机器人辅助腹腔镜前列腺癌根治术的效果都优于开放式耻骨后前列腺根治术。随着医院越来越多地使用手术机器人,还需要根据索赔数据对患者的长期病程进行进一步研究,以确认手术机器人的固有优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Urology
BMC Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
177
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Urology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of urological disorders, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology. The journal considers manuscripts in the following broad subject-specific sections of urology: Endourology and technology Epidemiology and health outcomes Pediatric urology Pre-clinical and basic research Reconstructive urology Sexual function and fertility Urological imaging Urological oncology Voiding dysfunction Case reports.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信