Abstract
Background
We examined the patient characteristics, operative proceedings and the outcomes of the initial series of 125 cases of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) in an independent hospital in Ireland, performed by two surgeons using the da Vinci® surgical system.
Materials and methods
The series data were gathered prospectively in a consecutive series. Focus was given to the outcome trifecta of oncological control, urinary continence and erectile function. We also report on complications reported using the Clavien–Dindo classification.
Results
Mean patient age was 58.86 years, with a range between 47 and 71 years. Positive surgical margin rates were 11.3% overall (n = 14); 7.8% (n = 8) in the pT2 group (n = 101) and 30% (n = 6) in the pT3/pT4 (n = 20) group. 93% (n = 125) of patients are continent at 6 months. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was 92.4%. 72% (n = 43) of patients under the age of 65 with normal preoperative erectile function are potent at 1 year post-operatively. No patient in this series required a blood transfusion. Some form of relatively minor complication occurred in 12.8% (n = 16) of cases; there was no mortality rate, and no complication was life-threatening or resulted in single-organ or multiple-organ failure.
Conclusions
With a combination of high-level fellowship training of surgeons, a co-operative and combined approach to cases between surgeons, institutional support, and enthusiasm, encouragement and dedication from ancillary staff and colleagues, we have shown that a programme can be established with excellent levels of safety and efficacy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
(2010) National Cancer Registry of Ireland. Cancer Trends. No. 3. Recent trends in prostate cancer. Available from: National Cancer Registry, Ireland, http://www.ncri.ie/pubs/pubfiles/prostate%20trends.pdf. Cited 12 Aug 2010
Sanda MG, Kaplan ID (2009) A 64-year old man with low-risk prostate cancer: review of prostate cancer treatment. JAMA 301(20):2141–2151
Drummond FJ, Carsin AE, Sharp L, Comber H (2010) Trends in prostate specific antigen testing in Ireland: lessons from a country without guidelines. Ir J Med Sci 179(1):43–49
Ficarra V, Novara G, Artibani W et al (2009) Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies. Eur Urol 55:1037–1063
Kang DC, Hardee MJ, Fesperman SF, Stoffs TL, Dahm P (2010) Low quality of evidence for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: results of a systematic review of the published literature. Eur Urol 57:930–937
Ficarra V, Novara G, Fracalanza S et al (2009) A prospective, non-randomised trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution. BJU Int. 104:1804–1813
Patel VR, Coelho RF, Chauhan S et al (2010) Continence, potency and oncological outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: early trifecta results of a high-volume surgeon. BJU Int 106:696–702
Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Palmer KJ, Rocco B, Patel MB, Patel VR (2009) Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a review of current outcomes. BJU Int 104(10):1428–1435 (Epub 2009 Oct 5, review)
Ficarra V, Cavalleri S, Novara G, Aragona M, Artibana W (2007) Evidence from robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review. Eur Urol 51:45–56
Murphy DG, Bjartell A, Ficarra V et al (2010) Downsides of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: limitations and complications. Eur Urol 57:735–746
Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA (2004) Classification surgical complications: a new proposal with a valuation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg 240:205–213
Carlsson S, Nilsson AE, Schumacher MC et al (2010) Surgery related complications in 1253 robot-assisted and 485 open retropubic prostatectomies at the Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden. Urology. 75:1092–1099
Murphy DG, Kerger M, Crowe H, Peters JS, Costello AJ (2009) Operative details and oncological and functional outcome of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: 400 cases with a minimum of 12 months follow-up. Eur Urol 55:1358–1367
Coelho RF, Palmer KJ, Rocco B et al (2010) Early complication rates in a single-surgeon series of 2500 robotic assisted radical prostatectomies: report applying a standardised grading system. Eur Urol 57:945–952
Fracalanza S, Ficarra V, Cavalleri S et al (2008) Is robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy less invasive than retropubic radical prostatectomy? Results from a prospective, unrandomised, comparative study. BJU Int. 101:1145–1149
Hu JC, Gu X, Lipsitz SR et al (2009) Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive vs open radical prostatectomy. JAMA 302(14):1557–1564
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bouchier-Hayes, D.M., Clancy, K.X., Canavan, K. et al. Initial consecutive 125 cases of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed in Ireland’s first robotic radical prostatectomy centre. Ir J Med Sci 181, 21–25 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-011-0769-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11845-011-0769-2