Advertisement

World Journal of Urology

, Volume 25, Issue 1, pp 105–110 | Cite as

From proficiency to expert, when does the learning curve for robotic-assisted prostatectomies plateau? The Columbia University experience

  • David SamadiEmail author
  • Adam Levinson
  • Ari Hakimi
  • Ridwan Shabsigh
  • Mitchell C. Benson
Original Article

Abstract

To describe our single-institution experience with our first 70 consecutive robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomies (RLPs) with particular focus on effect of learning curve on operative time, length of stay and blood loss. We also report our short-term outcome data in this heterogeneous cohort of men with prostate cancer (PCa). We reviewed our institutional database for the first 70 consecutive RLPs performed by a single surgeon (DS) over a 21-month period (March 2003 to December 2004). Surgical, pathologic and postoperative outcomes were analyzed. In order to evaluate the impact of the surgeon’s and institution’s learning curve on outcomes, the cases were divided into quartiles and stratified accordingly to identify trends. Ninety-nine percent (69/70) of all procedures were successfully completed robotically. Mean blood loss, operative time and mean length of stay were 231 ml, 264 min and 1.9 days, respectively. At follow-up, 76% of all patients were fully continent (no pads) and 93% (62/67) had undetectable PSA. The most dramatic improvement in surgical outcomes was seen within the first quartile of cases; however a statistically significant improvement trend existed throughout the series. This included a downward trend in operative time (< 0.00001), estimated blood loss (< 0.00001), and length of hospital stay (= 0.003). This trend continued when controlled for in a multivariate analysis. Our results compare favorably with other RLP series as well as conventional laparoscopic series. Proficiency is achieved within the first 20 cases; however surgical outcomes continue to improve for RLP throughout the first 70 cases and perhaps beyond.

Keywords

Prostate Specific Antigen Gleason Score Estimate Blood Loss Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Laparoscopic Prostatectomy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Guillonneau B, el-Fettouh H, BaumertH et al (2003) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: oncological evaluation after 1,000 cases at Montsouris Institute. J Urol 169(4):1261–1266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rassweiler J, Seemann O, Schulze M, Teber D, Hatzinger M, Frede T (2003) Laparoscopic versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparative study at a single institution. J Urol 169(5):1689–1693PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A et al (2002a) Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 168(3):945–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bentas W, Wolfram M, Jones J, Brautigam R, Kramer W, Binder J (2003a) Robotic technology and the translation of open radical prostatectomy to laparoscopy: the early frankfurt experience with robotic radical prostatectomy and one year follow-up. Eur Urol 44(2):175–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, Clayman RV (2003a) Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 170(5):1738–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guillonneau B, Vallancien G (2000) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol 163:1643PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eichel L, Aherling TE, Clayman RV (2004) Role of robotics in laparoscopic urologic surgery. Urol Clin North Am 31(4):781–792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M (2003) A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int 92(3):205–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G (2002b) Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the vattikuti urology institute experience. Urology 60(5):864–868CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahlering TE, Woo D, Eichel L, Lee DI, Edwards R, Skarecky D (2004a) Robot assisted vs. open prostatectomy a comparision of one surgeon’s outcomes. Urology 63(5):819–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Menon M, Shrivastava A, Tewari A et al. (2002c) Laparoscopic and robot assisted radical prostatectomy: establishment of a structured program and preliminary analysis of outcomes. J Urol 168(3):945–949CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bentas W, Wolfram M, Jones J, Brautigam R, Kramer W, Binder J (2003b) Robotic technology and the translation of open radical prostatectomy to laparoscopy: the early Frankfurt experience with robotic radical prostatectomy and one year follow-up. Eur Urol 44(2):175–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ahlering TE, Skarecky D, Lee D, Clayman RV (2003b) Successful transfer of open surgical skills to a laparoscopic environment using a robotic interface: initial experience with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol 170(5):1738–1741CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Binder J, Kramer W (2001) Robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 87:408–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wolfram M, Brautigam R, Engl T, Bentas W, Heitkamp S, Ostwald M et al (2003) Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Frankfur technique. World J Urol 21(3):128–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bentas W, Wolfram M, Jones J, Brautigam R, Kramer W, Binder J (2003c) Robotic technology and the translation of open radical prostatectomy to laparoscopy: the early Frankfurt experience with robotic radical prostatectomy and one year follow-up. Eur Urol 44(2):175–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ahlering TE, Woo D, Eichel L, Lee DI, Edwards R, Skarecky DW (2004b) Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparison of one surgeon’s outcomes. Urology 63(5):819–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Menon M, Tewari A, Peabody JO, Shrivastava A, Kaul S, Bhandari A, Hemal AK (2004) Vattikuti institute prostatectomy, a technique of robotic radical prostatectomy for management of localized carcinoma of the prostate: experience of over 1,100 cases. Urol Clin North Am 31(4):701–717PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Samadi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Adam Levinson
    • 1
  • Ari Hakimi
    • 1
  • Ridwan Shabsigh
    • 1
  • Mitchell C. Benson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of UrologyColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations