Key result
Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative delirium compared to conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (17.3% vs 32.4%, p=0.03).
Why the study?
Limited data are available regarding the incidence and risk factors for postoperative delirium in patients undergoing robot-assisted versus conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
Does robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium compared to conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer?
Cohort (n=152)
No
Does robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium compared to conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer?
Absolute Event Rate: 17.3% vs 32.4%
p-value: p=0.03
Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative delirium compared to conventional laparoscopy, likely due to lower intra-abdominal pressure requirements.
Background Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy ( RALRP) has better effects than conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). However, limited data is available regarding the incidence and risk factors for developing postoperative delirium in patients undergoing these two procedures. This study aimed to assess the incidence of postoperative delirium in patients undergoing RALRP and LRP, and evaluated the risk factors for developing postoperative delirium Methods From June 2013 to December 2019, 81 cases of RALRP patients and 71 cases of LRP patients were included in this study. The unpaired Student t tests, repetitive measure analysis of variance and chi-square test were used to compare several different parameters. The binary logistic regression analysis was used to explore the independent risk factors of postoperative delirium . Results The incidences of postoperative delirium in group RALRP and LRP were (17.3% VS 32.4%, P = 0.03), IAP was (12.72 ± 1.87 VS 13.37 ± 1.12 mmHg; P = 0.01), PaCO 2 at post-pneumoperitoneum and after loosening pneumoperitoneum were (47.89 ± 10.89 VS 38.65 ± 16.32 mmHg; P < 0.001; 40.77 ± 5.34 VS 43.57 ± 4.54 mmHg; P = 0.001), the overall cost was (8.29 ± 5.55 VS 5.18 ± 1.51 Ten thousand RMB, P < 0.001). The incidence of postoperative delirium increased 1.17 times, 1.13 times, and 1.66 times for each unit increase recovery time (T r ), post-pneumoperitoneum PaCO 2 and IAP. Conclusion The RALRP group had a lower IAP, lower incidence of postoperative delirium and shorter recovery time compared with the LRP group, but the overall cost was higher. IAP was the main factor affecting the incidence of postoperative delirium.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hu et al. (2021) conducted a cohort in Prostate cancer (n=152). Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) vs. Conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) was evaluated on Incidence of postoperative delirium (p=0.03). Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy was associated with a significantly lower incidence of postoperative delirium compared to conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (17.3% vs 32.4%, p=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: