多端口与单端口机器人前列腺根治术的新型患者选择算法的发展。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Nicolas A Soputro, Jaya S Chavali, Roxana Ramos-Carpinteyro, Adriana M Pedraza, Carter D Mikesell, Jihad Kaouk
{"title":"多端口与单端口机器人前列腺根治术的新型患者选择算法的发展。","authors":"Nicolas A Soputro, Jaya S Chavali, Roxana Ramos-Carpinteyro, Adriana M Pedraza, Carter D Mikesell, Jihad Kaouk","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06440-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to develop a patient selection algorithm to better guide clinical decision-making towards the different approaches of multi-port (MP) and single-port (SP) robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was performed on an institutional review board (IRB) -approved database to identify all consecutive patients who underwent transperitoneal MP, extraperitoneal SP, and transvesical SP-RARP between 2018 and 2024. Baseline clinicodemographic variables were collected. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to construct two separate nomograms to predict the likelihood of MP versus SP-RARP as well as extraperitoneal versus transvesical SP-RARP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RARP was completed in 529 patients, which included 91 (17.2%) transperitoneal MP-RARP, 195 (36.9%) extraperitoneal SP-RARP, and 243 (45.9%) transvesical SP-RARP. All SP cases were successfully completed without the need for conversion or additional ports. When comparing MP versus SP, lower prostate cancer risk categories, smaller prostate glands, and a more significant history of previous abdominal surgery as represented by a higher Hostile Abdomen Index (HAI) were identified as clinically significant predictors of SP-RARP. Within the SP-RARP cohort, all three aforementioned variables and the absence of any adverse features on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) favored transvesical over extraperitoneal SP-RARP. Internal validation of the two nomograms demonstrated reasonable performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.73 and 0.77, respectively. Considering the optimal cutoff points of 0.87 and 0.54 for the two models, all cases of SP-RARP and transvesical SP-RARP who scored above the threshold demonstrated superior perioperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Herein, we have developed a novel patient selection algorithm aimed at better guiding clinical decision-making in the evolving landscape of contemporary RARP approaches. The findings highlighted in this study, which was based on more than five years of clinical experience, can be useful for institutions seeking to adopt or expand their SP-RARP practices and to ensure optimal perioperative outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":53228,"journal":{"name":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","volume":"77 4","pages":"508-517"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of novel patient selection algorithm for multi-port versus single-port robotic radical prostatectomy approaches.\",\"authors\":\"Nicolas A Soputro, Jaya S Chavali, Roxana Ramos-Carpinteyro, Adriana M Pedraza, Carter D Mikesell, Jihad Kaouk\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06440-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The aim of this study was to develop a patient selection algorithm to better guide clinical decision-making towards the different approaches of multi-port (MP) and single-port (SP) robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective study was performed on an institutional review board (IRB) -approved database to identify all consecutive patients who underwent transperitoneal MP, extraperitoneal SP, and transvesical SP-RARP between 2018 and 2024. Baseline clinicodemographic variables were collected. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to construct two separate nomograms to predict the likelihood of MP versus SP-RARP as well as extraperitoneal versus transvesical SP-RARP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>RARP was completed in 529 patients, which included 91 (17.2%) transperitoneal MP-RARP, 195 (36.9%) extraperitoneal SP-RARP, and 243 (45.9%) transvesical SP-RARP. All SP cases were successfully completed without the need for conversion or additional ports. When comparing MP versus SP, lower prostate cancer risk categories, smaller prostate glands, and a more significant history of previous abdominal surgery as represented by a higher Hostile Abdomen Index (HAI) were identified as clinically significant predictors of SP-RARP. Within the SP-RARP cohort, all three aforementioned variables and the absence of any adverse features on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) favored transvesical over extraperitoneal SP-RARP. Internal validation of the two nomograms demonstrated reasonable performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.73 and 0.77, respectively. Considering the optimal cutoff points of 0.87 and 0.54 for the two models, all cases of SP-RARP and transvesical SP-RARP who scored above the threshold demonstrated superior perioperative outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Herein, we have developed a novel patient selection algorithm aimed at better guiding clinical decision-making in the evolving landscape of contemporary RARP approaches. The findings highlighted in this study, which was based on more than five years of clinical experience, can be useful for institutions seeking to adopt or expand their SP-RARP practices and to ensure optimal perioperative outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":53228,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Minerva Urology and Nephrology\",\"volume\":\"77 4\",\"pages\":\"508-517\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Minerva Urology and Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06440-7\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva Urology and Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6051.25.06440-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究的目的是开发一种患者选择算法,以更好地指导临床决策多端口(MP)和单端口(SP)机器人根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)的不同方法。方法:在机构审查委员会(IRB)批准的数据库中进行回顾性研究,以确定2018年至2024年间接受经腹膜MP、腹腔外SP和经膀胱SP- rarp的所有连续患者。收集基线临床人口学变量。使用单因素和多因素回归分析构建两个独立的模态图来预测MP与SP-RARP以及腹腔外与经膀胱SP-RARP的可能性。结果:529例患者完成RARP,其中经腹腔MP-RARP 91例(17.2%),腹腔外SP-RARP 195例(36.9%),经膀胱SP-RARP 243例(45.9%)。所有SP病例均成功完成,无需转换或额外端口。当比较MP与SP时,较低的前列腺癌风险类别、较小的前列腺和较显著的既往腹部手术史(以较高的敌对腹部指数(HAI)为代表)被确定为SP- rarp的临床显著预测因素。在SP-RARP队列中,上述三个变量和术前磁共振成像(MRI)无任何不良特征均有利于经膀胱SP-RARP优于腹膜外SP-RARP。内部验证表明,两种图的曲线下面积(AUC)分别为0.73和0.77,性能合理。考虑到两种模型的最佳截断点分别为0.87和0.54,SP-RARP和经膀胱SP-RARP评分均高于阈值,围手术期预后均较好。结论:在此,我们开发了一种新的患者选择算法,旨在更好地指导当代RARP方法不断发展的临床决策。该研究基于5年多的临床经验,对寻求采用或扩大SP-RARP实践并确保最佳围手术期结果的机构非常有用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Development of novel patient selection algorithm for multi-port versus single-port robotic radical prostatectomy approaches.

Background: The aim of this study was to develop a patient selection algorithm to better guide clinical decision-making towards the different approaches of multi-port (MP) and single-port (SP) robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP).

Methods: A retrospective study was performed on an institutional review board (IRB) -approved database to identify all consecutive patients who underwent transperitoneal MP, extraperitoneal SP, and transvesical SP-RARP between 2018 and 2024. Baseline clinicodemographic variables were collected. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to construct two separate nomograms to predict the likelihood of MP versus SP-RARP as well as extraperitoneal versus transvesical SP-RARP.

Results: RARP was completed in 529 patients, which included 91 (17.2%) transperitoneal MP-RARP, 195 (36.9%) extraperitoneal SP-RARP, and 243 (45.9%) transvesical SP-RARP. All SP cases were successfully completed without the need for conversion or additional ports. When comparing MP versus SP, lower prostate cancer risk categories, smaller prostate glands, and a more significant history of previous abdominal surgery as represented by a higher Hostile Abdomen Index (HAI) were identified as clinically significant predictors of SP-RARP. Within the SP-RARP cohort, all three aforementioned variables and the absence of any adverse features on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) favored transvesical over extraperitoneal SP-RARP. Internal validation of the two nomograms demonstrated reasonable performance with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.73 and 0.77, respectively. Considering the optimal cutoff points of 0.87 and 0.54 for the two models, all cases of SP-RARP and transvesical SP-RARP who scored above the threshold demonstrated superior perioperative outcomes.

Conclusions: Herein, we have developed a novel patient selection algorithm aimed at better guiding clinical decision-making in the evolving landscape of contemporary RARP approaches. The findings highlighted in this study, which was based on more than five years of clinical experience, can be useful for institutions seeking to adopt or expand their SP-RARP practices and to ensure optimal perioperative outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva Urology and Nephrology
Minerva Urology and Nephrology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
32.70%
发文量
237
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信