Does The Learning Curve Affect the Surgical, Functional, and Oncologic Outcomes in Bilateral Nerve-Sparing Robot Assisted Laparoscopic Prostatectomy?
da vinci robotic surgical system
potency
prostate cancer
robot-assisted prostatectomy
urinary continence
Journal
Cureus
ISSN: 2168-8184
Titre abrégé: Cureus
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101596737
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Jul 2019
30 Jul 2019
Historique:
entrez:
3
10
2019
pubmed:
3
10
2019
medline:
3
10
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Introduction Nowadays, the expectations for functional prostatectomy outcomes are quite high. Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) has become an increasingly common treatment option for men with localized prostate cancer. In this study, we aimed to present the results of our bilateral nerve-sparing RALRP procedure and to evaluate the effects of the learning curve (LC) on perioperative data, early oncologic, and functional outcomes. Methods The records of 132 RALRP cases performed between January 2016 and March 2019 by a single surgeon experienced in open and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were evaluated retrospectively. Results of 91 cases with the bilateral nerve-sparing technique were analyzed. The learning curve was determined using the moving average method. LC analysis using the moving average method showed that the LC stabilized between cases 40 and 50. So, patients were divided into two groups: group 1 consisted of the first 45 cases, while group 2 consisted of 46-91
Identifiants
pubmed: 31576266
doi: 10.7759/cureus.5274
pmc: PMC6764620
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
e5274Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019, Ucar et al.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
BJU Int. 2011 Aug;108(3):420-5
pubmed: 21050363
Eur Urol. 2009 May;55(5):1037-63
pubmed: 19185977
Eur Urol. 2006 Oct;50(4):711-8; discussion 718-20
pubmed: 16846679
Urol J. 2018 Nov 17;15(6):333-338
pubmed: 30345493
BJU Int. 2001 Mar;87(4):408-10
pubmed: 11251539
J Endourol. 2007 Apr;21(4):441-7
pubmed: 17451340
J Urol. 2010 May;183(5):1803-7
pubmed: 20299041
J Urol. 2003 Apr;169(4):1261-6
pubmed: 12629339
Can J Urol. 2009 Aug;16(4):4742-9; discussion 4749
pubmed: 19671227
Eur Urol. 2010 Jun;57(6):945-52
pubmed: 20181424
Eur Urol. 2007 Mar;51(3):755-62; discussion 763
pubmed: 17084520
Scand J Urol. 2013 Feb;47(1):10-8
pubmed: 22835035
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
Urology. 1997 Dec;50(6):854-7
pubmed: 9426713
Urology. 2005 Nov;66(5 Suppl):83-94
pubmed: 16194712
J Urol. 2003 Nov;170(5):1738-41
pubmed: 14532766
Eur Urol. 2006 Jul;50(1):98-104
pubmed: 16563608
BJU Int. 2010 Apr;105(8):1155-60
pubmed: 19888970
Urol Int. 2008;80(3):237-44
pubmed: 18480623
J Urol. 2002 Sep;168(3):945-9
pubmed: 12187196
J Urol. 2003 Dec;170(6 Pt 1):2292-5
pubmed: 14634399
J Urol. 2003 Jun;169(6):2063-5
pubmed: 12771720
CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424
pubmed: 30207593
Eur Urol. 2011 May;59(5):702-7
pubmed: 21296482
Eur Urol. 2011 Jan;59(1):61-71
pubmed: 21056534
Eur Urol. 2015 Aug;68(2):216-25
pubmed: 25770484
J Sex Med. 2010 Feb;7(2 Pt 1):839-45
pubmed: 19912486