Laparoscopic and Robot Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Establishment of a Structured Program and Preliminary Analysis of Outcomes

No AccessJournal of UrologyCLINICAL UROLOGY: ORIGINAL ARTICLES1 Sep 2002Laparoscopic and Robot Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Establishment of a Structured Program and Preliminary Analysis of Outcomes Mani Menon, Alok Shrivastava, Ashutosh Tewari, Richard Sarle, Ashok Hemal, James O. Peabody, and Guy Vallancien Mani MenonMani Menon, Alok ShrivastavaAlok Shrivastava, Ashutosh TewariAshutosh Tewari, Richard SarleRichard Sarle, Ashok HemalAshok Hemal, James O. PeabodyJames O. Peabody, and Guy VallancienGuy Vallancien View All Author Informationhttps: //doi. org/10. 1016/S0022-5347 (05) 64548-XAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract Purpose: The technique of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is difficult to master and is associated with a steep learning curve. We hypothesized that a structured approach to establishing a laparoscopic prostatectomy program would diminish complications during the learning process and that robotic technology would be useful in learning the operation. Materials and Methods: A structured laparoscopic radical prostatectomy program was introduced at the Vattikuti Urology Institute on October 23, 2000. One of 2 surgeons with a combined experience of more than 500 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies performed or supervised the first prostatectomies, training a third surgeon with extensive "open" surgical skills but no laparoscopic experience. The "trained" surgeon then started performing the operation independently with robotic assistance. The results of this approach were analyzed at the end of 12 months. Results: We performed 48 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies and 50 robot assisted prostatectomies within the 12-month period. The preoperative and intraoperative demographical variables were comparable in both groups as were the operative times, changes in hemoglobin concentrations, durations of hospitalization, positive margin rates and overall complication rates. All measured parameters were comparable to the "best-in-class" values for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy reported in the literature. Conclusions: A structured approach minimizes complications during the establishment of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy program. Robotic assistance helps skilled "open" surgeons learn the technique of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. References 1: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial short-term experience. Urology1997; 50: 854. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 2: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris technique. J Urol2000; 163: 1643. Link, Google Scholar 3: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: preliminary results. Urology2000; 55: 630. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 4 Menon, M. , Tewari, A. , Baize, B. et al: A prospective comparison of robot assisted anatomic prostatectomy and conventional radical retropubic prostatectomy: the early experience at the Vattikuti Urology Institute. Unpublished data Google Scholar 5: The University of Massachusetts technique of radical retropubic prostatectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol1995; 21: 66. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 6: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 240 procedures. Urol Clin North Am2001; 28: 189. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 7: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with the Heilbronn technique: an analysis of the first 180 cases. J Urol2001; 166: 2101. Link, Google Scholar 8: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The Creteil Experience. Eur Urol2001; 40: 38. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 9: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Technical aspects experience with 125 cases. Eur Urol2001; 40: 46. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 10: Intraoperative postoperative complications of radical retropubic prostatectomy in a consecutive series of 1, 000 cases. J Urol2001; 166: 1729. Link, Google Scholar 11: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: irrational exuberance? . Urology2001; 58: 503. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 12: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: CON. Urology2001; 58: 506. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 13: Remote laparoscopic radical prostatectomy carried out with a robot. Report of a case. . Prog Urol2000; 10: 520. Medline, Google Scholar 14: Telesurgical laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Initial experience. Eur Urol2001; 40: 75. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 15: Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. BJU Int2001; 87: 408. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 16: Robotically-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: feasibility study in men. Eur Urol2001; 40: 70. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 17: Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Results after 50 cases. Eur Urol2001; 40: 65. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar 18: Complications initial experience with 1228 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies at 6 European centers. J Urol2001; 165: 150. Google Scholar 19 Aristotle: Nichomachean Ethics, Book 1, chapt 7. 16, 350 BC Google Scholar From the Vattikuti Urology Institute, Henry Ford Health System, Detroit, Michigan, and the Department of Urology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, University Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France© 2002 by American Urological Association, Inc. FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited by Ragavan N, Bharathkumar S, Chirravur P and Sankaran S (2023) Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Utilizing Hugo RAS Platform: Initial ExperienceJournal of Endourology, 10. 1089/end. 2022. 0461, VOL. 37, NO. 2, (147-150), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2023. Gong S, Gong F and Kabarriti A (2022) Top 50 Most Cited Articles About OAB: A Bibliometric AnalysisUrology, 10. 1016/j. urology. 2022. 09. 038, Online publication date: 1-Nov-2022. Cacciamani G, Sholklapper T, Dell'Oglio P, Rocco B, Annino F, Antonelli A, Amenta M, Borghesi M, Bove P, Bozzini G, Cafarelli A, Celia A, Leonardo C, Ceruti C, Cindolo L, Crivellaro S, Dalpiaz O, Falabella R, Falsaperla M, Galfano A, Gallo F, Greco F, Minervini A, Parma P, Chiara Sighinolfi M, Pastore A, Pini G, Porreca A, Pucci L, Sciorio C, Schiavina R, Umari P, Varca V, Veneziano D, Verze P, Volpe A, Zaramella S, Lebastchi A, Abreu A, Mitropoulos D, Shekhar Biyani C, Sotelo R, Desai M, Artibani W and Gill I (2022) The Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration Project: Development of Criteria for Reporting Adverse Events During Surgical Procedures and Evaluating Their Impact on the Postoperative CourseEuropean Urology Focus, 10. 1016/j. euf. 2022. 01. 018, VOL. 8, NO. 6, (1847-1858), Online publication date: 1-Nov-2022. Tan W, Ta A and Kelly J (2022) Robotic surgery: getting the evidence rightMedical Journal of Australia, 10. 5694/mja2. 51726, VOL. 217, NO. 8, (391-393), Online publication date: 17-Oct-2022. Golan S, Frumer M, Zohar Y, Rosenbaum E, Yakimov M, Kedar D, Margel D, Baniel J, Steinmetz A, Groshar D, Domachevsky L and Bernstine H (2022) Neoadjuvant 177Lu-PSMA-I32: 1166; DOI: 1089/end. 2018. 0419) Journal of Endourology, 10. 1089/end. 2018. 29046. sar, VOL. 32, NO. 12, (1167-1167), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2018. Sridharan K and Sivaramakrishnan G (2018) Prostatectomies for localized prostate cancer: a mixed comparison network and cumulative meta-analysisJournal of Robotic Surgery, 10. 1007/s11701-018-0791-8, VOL. 12, NO. 4, (633-639), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2018. Hakenberg O (2019) A brief overview of the development of robot-assisted radical prostatectomyArab Journal of Urology, 10. 1016/j. aju. 2018. 06. 006, VOL. 16, NO. 3, (293-296), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2018. Pal R and Koupparis A (2019) Expanding the indications of robotic surgery in urology: A systematic review of the literatureArab Journal of Urology, 10. 1016/j. aju. 2018. 05. 005, VOL. 16, NO. 3, (270-284), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2018. Rassweiler J, Goezen A, Rassweiler-Seyfried M, Liatsikos E, Bach T, Stolzenburg J and Klein J (2018) Der Roboter in der Urologie – eine Analyse aktueller und zukünftiger GerätegenerationenRobots in urology—an analysis of current and future devicesDer Urologe, 10. 1007/s00120-018-0733-0, VOL. 57, NO. 9, (1075-1090), Online publication date: 1-Sep-2018. Goolam A, la Rosa A and Manoharan M (2017) Surgical Management of Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer with Review of Literature and Evolving EvidenceIndian Journal of Surgical Oncology, 10. 1007/s13193-016-0594-1, VOL. 9, NO. 2, (225-231), Online publication date: 1-Jun-2018. McGuinness L and Prasad Rai B (2018) Robotics in urologyThe Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England, 10. 1308/rcsann. supp1. 38, VOL. 100, NO. 6ₛup, (45-54), Online publication date: 1-May-2018. Large T and Krambeck A (2018) Evidence-based outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostateCurrent Opinion in Urology, 10. 1097/MOU. 0000000000000498, VOL. 28, NO. 3, (301-308), Online publication date: 1-May-2018. Secin F, Coelho R, Monzó Gardiner J, Salcedo J, Puente R, Martínez L, Finkelstein D, Valero R, León A, Angeloni D, Rozanec J, Berger M, Cavazzola L, Faria E, Machado R, Lott F, Campos F, Morales Montor J, Moreno C and Barrios H (2018) Robotic surgery in public hospitals of Latin-America: a castle of sand? World Journal of Urology, 10. 1007/s00345-018-2227-5, VOL. 36, NO. 4, (595-601), Online publication date: 1-Apr-2018. Gaitanidis A, Simopoulos C and Pitiakoudis M (2018) What to consider when designing a laparoscopic colorectal training curriculum: a review of the literatureTechniques in Coloproctology, 10. 1007/s10151-018-1760-y, VOL. 22, NO. 3, (151-160), Online publication date: 1-Mar-2018. Rassweiler J, Fiedler M, Charalampogiannis N, Kabakci A, Saglam R and Klein J (2017) Robot-assisted flexible ureteroscopy: an updateUrolithiasis, 10. 1007/s00240-017-1024-8, VOL. 46, NO. 1, (69-77), Online publication date: 1-Feb-2018. Kojima Y, Matsuoka K, Hoshi S, Koguchi T, Sato Y, Ogawa S and Haga N (2018) A state-of-the-art pediatric urology: robot-assisted surgery小児泌尿器科疾患に対する最新治療─ロボット支援手術─Nihon Shoni Jinzobyo Gakkai Zasshi, 10. 3165/jjpn. rv. 2018. 0004, VOL. 31, NO. 2, (114-122),. 黄 书 (2018) Comparison of Perioperative and Functional Outcomes between Standard Laparoscopic and Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systemic Review and Meta-AnalysisAsian Case Reports in Surgery, 10. 12677/ACRS. 2018. 73004, VOL. 07, NO. 03, (17-30),. Prasad A (2018) Robotic Mini-Gastric Bypass Essentials of Mini ‒ One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass, 10. 1007/978-3-319-76177-0₂0, (171-179),. Rassweiler J, Goezen A, Klein J and Liatsikos E (2018) New Robotic Platforms Robotic Urology, 10. 1007/978-3-319-65864-3₁, (3-38),. Hampson L and Meng M (2018) Ethical and Medicolegal Considerations Complications in Robotic Urologic Surgery, 10. 1007/978-3-319-62277-4₈, (59-71),. Patel M, Chauhan S, Palmer K and Patel V (2018) Difficulties in Robotic Radical Prostatectomy Difficult Conditions in Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery, 10. 1007/978-3-319-52581-5₁6, (211-230),. Mucksavage P and Eun D (2018) The Robotic Patient-Side Assistant Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery, 10. 1007/978-3-319-20645-5₇, (109-119),. Abbou C and Ruiz L (2018) Laparoscopy or Robotic Radical Prostatectomy: Pros and Cons Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery, 10. 1007/978-3-319-20645-5₃5, (487-492),. Abdollah F, Dalela D and Menon M (2018) Development of the Vattikuti Institute Prostatectomy: Historical Perspective and Technical Nuances Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery, 10. 1007/978-3-319-20645-5₁9, (255-273),. Cole A, Friedlander D and Trinh Q (2018) Health Services Research and Robotic Surgery Robotics in Genitourinary Surgery, 10. 1007/978-3-319-20645-5₁8, (235-252),. Burttet L, Varaschin G, Berger A, Cavazzola L, Berger M and Silva Neto B (2017) Prospective evaluation of vesicourethral anastomosis outcomes in robotic radical prostatectomy during early experience in a university hospitalInternational braz j urol, 10. 1590/s1677-5538. ibju. 2016. 0466, VOL. 43, NO. 6, (1176-1184), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2017. Rassweiler J, Autorino R, Klein J, Mottrie A, Goezen A, Stolzenburg J, Rha K, Schurr M, Kaouk J, Patel V, Dasgupta P and Liatsikos E (2017) Future of robotic surgery in urologyBJU International, 10. 1111/bju. 13851, VOL. 120, NO. 6, (822-841), Online publication date: 1-Dec-2017. Costa D, R, J, A, F, M, F, K, M, P and Silva M (2017) in a VOL. NO. 11, Online publication date: H, Wang Y, S, Y, F and B (2017) of Robot-Assisted A Analysis of Surgeons from to of Endourology, VOL. 31, NO. 9, Online publication date: J, H and D (2017) for postoperative pain control following robot-assisted prostatectomy: a prospective of VOL. 31, NO. 4, Online publication date: K, F and E (2017) in and Robotic Surgical of Surgical VOL. NO. 4, Online publication date: G, A and J (2017) the for Urologic Pelvic Laparoscopic VOL. NO. 3, Online publication date: G, Pini A, B, L, L, S, A, P, N, C, A, S, N, and P (2017) Robotic Surgery in a of Surgical VOL. NO. Online publication date: C, L, Cohen C and A (2017) and in Urologic Oncology, and of Medicine, VOL. NO. 4, Online publication date: A, C and T (2017) We Results with Robot-Assisted Radical of Endourology, VOL. 31, NO. Online publication date: X, Wang L, and Wang Comparison of and outcomes between standard laparoscopic and radical prostatectomy: a review and VOL. 31, NO. 3, Online publication date: Cole A, Trinh Sood A and Menon M The of Robotic Surgery in the New of Urology, VOL. NO. Online publication date: Abdollah F, T and Menon M (2017) Surgical in the Robotic Surgery The of Structured Urology Focus, VOL. 3, NO. 1, Online publication date: C, O, M, G, Mottrie A, Dasgupta P and K (2017) in Robot-assisted Urologic A Urology Focus, VOL. 3, NO. 1, Online publication date: A, P and P (2017) The Robotic Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Management of Prostate. H, H, K, S, G and S (2017) A feasibility study of an for VOL. 44, NO. 1, Online publication date: F, R, S, F, G and A for the evaluation of robotic in and and Health VOL. NO. 6, Abdollah F, Dalela D, Sood A, J, Jeong W, B, N, Rogers C, M, Peabody J, A, F, M, A and Menon M control outcomes