Introduction: Localized prostate cancer is increasingly treated by robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). We evaluated the introduction of RARP following a training program at a high-volume robotic center. Materials and Methods: Before starting RARP, a young urologist followed a 6-month training program. The outcome of his first 50 RARPs was compared with the last 50 open radical prostatectomies (ORPs) performed by an experienced urologist at the same institution. Tumor characteristics were similar in both groups. Median follow-up was 12 (RARP) and 31 (ORP) months (p < 0.001). Results: RARP was associated with more nerve sparing (82 vs. ORP 46%, p < 0.001), longer operation time [median 205 (range 120-310) vs. ORP 180 (85-280) min, p = 0.001], lower decline of postoperative hemoglobin [RARP -2.1 (0.1-4.5) vs. ORP -4.0 (1.0-7.0) g/dl, p < 0.001] and shorter catheter stay [6 (5-47) vs. ORP 14 (9-43) days, p < 0.001]. Complication rates were similar. Overall and pT2-positive surgical margin rate was 8 vs. 24% (p = 0.054) and 0 vs. 11.8% (p = 0.114) for RARP vs. ORP, respectively. One-year urinary continence rate was 76.7 (RARP) and 75.8% (ORP, p = 0.833). Conclusions: RARP was safely introduced after a training program in a high-volume robotic center, both surgically, oncologically and functionally.

Keywords:
Prostate cancer, Radical prostatectomy, Robot-assisted surgery
1.
Lumen N, Fonteyne V, De Meerleert G, Ost P, Villeirs G, Mottrie A, De Visschere P, De Troyer B, Oosterlinck W: Population screening for prostate cancer: an overview of available studies and meta-analysis. Int J Urol 2012;19:100-108.
2.
Heidenreich A, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Joniau S, Mason M, Matveev V, Mottet N, Schmid HP, van der Kwast T, Wiegel T, Zattoni F: Eau guidelines on prostate cancer. 1. Screening, diagnosis, and treatment of clinically localised disease. Eur Urol 2011;59:61-71.
3.
Sammon J, Perry A, Beaule L, Kinkead T, Clark D, Hansen M: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: learning rate analysis as an objective measure of the acquisition of surgical skill. BJU Int 2010;106:855-860.
4.
Secin FP, Savage C, Abbou C, de La Taille A, Salomon L, Rassweiler J, Hruza M, Rozet F, Cathelineau X, Janetschek G, Nassar F, Turk I, Vanni AJ, Gill IS, Koenig P, Kaouk JH, Martinez Pineiro L, Pansadoro V, Emiliozzi P, Bjartell A, Jiborn T, Eden C, Richards AJ, Van Velthoven R, Stolzenburg JU, Rabenalt R, Su LM, Pavlovich CP, Levinson AW, Touijer KA, Vickers A, Guillonneau B: The learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an international multicenter study. J Urol 2010;184:2291-2296.
5.
Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, Clayman RV: Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2003;170:1738-1741.
6.
Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A, Sarle R, Hemal A, Peabody JO, Vallancien G: Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 2002;168:945-949.
7.
White MA, De Haan AP, Stephens DD, Maatman TK, Maatman TJ: Comparative analysis of surgical margins between radical retropubic prostatectomy and RALP: are patients sacrificed during initiation of robotics program? Urology 2009;73:567-571.
8.
Leroy TJ, Thiel DD, Duchene DA, Parker AS, Igel TC, Wehle MJ, Goetzl M, Thrasher JB: Safety and peri-operative outcomes during learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study of fellowship-trained robotic surgeons versus experienced open radical prostatectomy surgeons incorporating robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol 2010;24:1665-1669.
9.
Sim HG, Yip SK, Lau WK, Tan YH, Wong MY, Cheng CW: Team-based approach reduces learning curve in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Int J Urol 2006;13:560-564.
10.
Atug F, Castle EP, Srivastav SK, Burgess SV, Thomas R, Davis R: Positive surgical margins in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of learning curve on oncologic outcomes. Eur Urol 2006;49:866-871.
11.
Gumus E, Boylu U, Turan T, Onol FF: The learning curve of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 2011;25:1633-1637.
12.
Zorn KC, Orvieto MA, Gong EM, Mikhail AA, Gofrit ON, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL: Robotic radical prostatectomy learning curve of a fellowship-trained laparoscopic surgeon. J Endourol 2007;21:441-447.
13.
Doumerc N, Yuen C, Savdie R, Rahman MB, Rasiah KK, Pe Benito R, Delprado W, Matthews J, Haynes AM, Stricker PD: Should experienced open prostatic surgeons convert to robotic surgery? The real learning curve for one surgeon over 3 years. BJU Int 2010;106:378-384.
14.
Jaffe J, Castellucci S, Cathelineau X, Harmon J, Rozet F, Barret E, Vallancien G: Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: a single-institutions learning curve. Urology 2009;73:127-133.
15.
Hong YM, Sutherland DE, Linder B, Engel JD: ‘Learning curve' may not be enough: assessing the oncological experience curve for robotic radical prostatectomy. J Endourol 2010;24:473-477.
16.
Zorn KC, Gautam G, Shalhav AL, Clayman RV, Ahlering TE, Albala DM, Lee DI, Sundaram CP, Matin SF, Castle EP, Winfield HN, Gettman MT, Lee BR, Thomas R, Patel VR, Leveillee RJ, Wong C, Badlani GH, Rha KH, Eggener SE, Wiklund P, Mottrie A, Atug F, Kural AR, Joseph JV: Training, credentialing, proctoring and medicolegal risks of robotic urological surgery: recommendations of the Society of Urologic Robotic Surgeons. J Urol 2009;182:1126-1132.
17.
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA: Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 2004;240:205-213.
18.
Mottrie A, Gallina A, De Wil P, Thuer D, Novara G, Ficarra V: Balancing continence function and oncological outcomes during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). BJU Int 2011;108:999-1006.
19.
Walsh PC, Lepor H, Eggleston JC: Radical prostatectomy with preservation of sexual function: anatomical and pathological considerations. Prostate 1983;4:473-485.
20.
Egevad L, Srigley JR, Delahunt B: International society of urological pathology consensus conference on handling and staging of radical prostatectomy specimens. Adv Anat Pathol 2011;18:301-305.
21.
D'Alonzo RC, Gan TJ, Moul JW, Albala DM, Polascik TJ, Robertson CN, Sun L, Dahm P, Habib AS: A retrospective comparison of anesthetic management of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy. J Clin Anesth 2009;21:322-328.
22.
Scales CD Jr, Jones PJ, Eisenstein EL, Preminger GM, Albala DM: Local cost structures and the economics of robot assisted radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2005;174:2323-2329.
23.
Coelho RF, Rocco B, Patel MB, Orvieto MA, Chauhan S, Ficarra V, Melegari S, Palmer KJ, Patel VR: Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a critical review of outcomes reported by high-volume centers. J Endourol 2010;24:2003-2015.
24.
Novara G, Ficarra V, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Shariat SF, Stolzenburg JU, Van Poppel H, Zattoni F, Montorsi F, Mottrie A, Wilson TG: Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012;62:431-452.
25.
Novara G, Ficarra V, Mocellin S, Ahlering TE, Carroll PR, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Menon M, Patel VR, Shariat SF, Tewari AK, Van Poppel H, Zattoni F, Montorsi F, Mottrie A, Rosen RC, Wilson TG: Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting oncologic outcome after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2012;62:382-404.
26.
Williams AK, Chalasani V, Martinez CH, Osbourne E, Stitt L, Izawa JI, Pautler SE: Cumulative summation graphs are a useful tool for monitoring positive surgical margin rates in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2010;107:1648-1652.
27.
Karakiewicz PI, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Cagiannos I, Stricker PD, Klein E, Cangiano T, Schroder FH, Scardino PT, Kattan MW: Prognostic impact of positive surgical margins in surgically treated prostate cancer: multi-institutional assessment of 5831 patients. Urology 2005;66:1245-1250.
28.
Schroeck FR, Krupski TL, Sun L, Albala DM, Price MM, Polascik TJ, Robertson CN, Tewari AK, Moul JW: Satisfaction and regret after open retropubic or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 2008;54:785-793.
29.
Thiel DD, Francis P, Heckman MG, Winfield HN: Prospective evaluation of factors affecting operating time in a residency/fellowship training program incorporating robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol 2008;22:1331-1338.
30.
Schroeck FR, de Sousa CA, Kalman RA, Kalia MS, Pierre SA, Haleblian GE, Sun L, Moul JW, Albala DM: Trainees do not negatively impact the institutional learning curve for robotic prostatectomy as characterized by operative time, estimated blood loss, and positive surgical margin rate. Urology 2008;71:597-601.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.