Safety and feasibility of outpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
- 93 Downloads
Since its inception, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has developed into a familiar surgical modality with improved perioperative outcomes including decreased hospital stay for localized prostate cancer patients. Experience with outpatient RARP has been reported as early as 2010. In this study, we evaluate the safety and feasibility of outpatient RARP by comparing perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing outpatient RARP to patients discharged on the day following surgery. This is a single-institution retrospective cohort study. Patients with localized disease who underwent RARP without pelvic lymph node dissection from September 2017 to January 2018 were included. T tests and Chi-squared analysis were used to compare demographic and perioperative characteristics of patients who were discharged on the same day of surgery (outpatient RARP) to patients discharged on the day after surgery (inpatient RARP). Of the 51 patients included in the study, 26 underwent outpatient RARP while 25 underwent inpatient RARP. There was no significant difference in mean age (61.4 vs 65.8 years, p = 0.05), BMI (27.1 vs 28.3 kg/m2, p = 0.35), ethnicity, tobacco use (8 vs 15%, p = 0.41), PSA (8.7 vs 8.4 ng/dL, p = 0.77), biopsy Gleason score distribution, prostate size (51.8 vs 57.7 cc, p = 0.26) or preoperative hemoglobin (14.3 vs 13.4 g/dL, p = 0.06), respectively. There was no significant difference between operative time (95.3 vs 101 min, p = 0.16), EBL (52.8 vs 66.5 cc, p = 0.08), postoperative change in hemoglobin (− 1 vs − 1.1 g/dL, p = 0.62), pathologic stage distribution or complication rate (4 vs 8%, p = 0.58) between patients who underwent outpatient vs inpatient RARP, respectively. Outpatient RARP offers similar or improved perioperative outcomes when compared to inpatient RARP. We advocate outpatient RARP as a safe and feasible alternative to inpatient RARP for appropriately selected prostate cancer patients. Furthermore, we introduce an outpatient model that can be applied to other institutions seeking to implement outpatient RARP.
KeywordsRobotic prostatectomy Outpatient robotic surgery Prostate cancer Outpatient prostatectomy Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy Safety of robotic surgery
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Pooya Banapour, Peter Elliott, Ramzi Jabaji, Madhur Merchant, Apurba Pathak, Ashish Parekh and Kirk Tamaddon declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 6.Ploussard S (2018) Robotic surgery in urology: facts and reality. What are the real advantages of robotic approaches for prostate cancer patients? Curr Opin Urol 28(2):153–158Google Scholar