Publication: Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP in patients with prostate cancer based on risk groups
2
Issued Date
2020-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
20905998
2090598X
2090598X
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85083518828
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Arab Journal of Urology. (2020)
Suggested Citation
Napat Amornratananont, Kun Sirisopana, Suchin Worawichawong, Panas Chalermsanyakorn, Premsant Sangkum, Suthep Pacharatakul, Charoen Leenanupunth, Wisoot Kongchareonsombat Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP in patients with prostate cancer based on risk groups. Arab Journal of Urology. (2020). doi:10.1080/2090598X.2020.1750865 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/54658
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP in patients with prostate cancer based on risk groups
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2020, © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. Objective: To compare the perioperative and pathological outcomes between robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP based on the patient’s risk. Patients and methods: The medical records of 588 patients with prostate cancer who underwent RP, using minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques (240 LRP and 348 RALRP) by a single surgeon during January 2008 to June 2018 at the Ramathibodi Hospital, were retrospectively reviewed. The patient’s risk was classified according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guideline, 2018. The demographic, perioperative, and pathological data of patients were collected. The differences in perioperative and pathological outcomes between LRP and RALRP in each risk classification were assessed using chi-square, Fisher’s exact tests and logistic regression, as appropriate. Results: In terms of positive margins, RALRP had significant advantages in high-risk patients when compared to LRP (adjusted odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.26–0.84), while there were no differences in the low- and intermediate-risk patients. Overall, the patients who underwent RALRP had significant advantages over those who underwent LRP in terms of operative time, estimate blood loss, and blood transfusion rate. While, adjacent organ injury rate and length of hospital stay were similar for both techniques in all subgroup analyses. Conclusion: MIS techniques appear to be safe, especially RALRP, which has significantly better perioperative outcomes in all subgroups of patient risk classification, and in the high-risk patient group it seems to have better pathological outcomes when compared to LRP. Abbreviations: EBL: estimated blood loss; LOS: length of hospital stay; PSM: positive surgical margin; (L)(O)(RAL)RP: (laparoscopic) (open) (robot-assisted laparoscopic) radical prostatectomy; MIS: minimally invasive surgery.