Evolution of Robotic Urology in Clinical Practice from the Beginning to Now: Results from the GRAND Study Register.

Laparoscopic surgery Minimally invasive surgery Perioperative outcomes Robotic surgery

Journal

European urology focus
ISSN: 2405-4569
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol Focus
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101665661

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
28 Aug 2024
Historique:
received: 21 05 2024
revised: 18 07 2024
accepted: 16 08 2024
medline: 31 8 2024
pubmed: 31 8 2024
entrez: 29 8 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Major urological guidelines do not currently recommend robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopic or open surgery due to the lack of high-quality evidence. We aimed to provide real-world data on the evolution of robotic urology and to compare its perioperative outcomes with those of laparoscopic and open surgeries. We used the GeRmAn Nationwide inpatient Data (GRAND), provided by the Research Data Center of the Federal Bureau of Statistics (2005-2021), and performed multiple patient-level analyses. We included patients undergoing major urological surgeries and report the largest study in the field with 993 276 patients. An open approach was performed in 733 416 cases, a laparoscopic approach in 109 428, and a robot-assisted approach in 150 432. Overall, 442 811 (45%) patients underwent radical prostatectomy, 129 943 (13%) radical cystectomy, 192 340 (19%) radical nephrectomy, 123 648 (12%) partial nephrectomy, 56 114 (5.6%) nephroureterectomy, and 48 420 (4.9%) pyeloplasty. The number of patients undergoing robot-assisted surgery increased exponentially, while the number of patients undergoing open surgery decreased substantially throughout the past few years. Patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery displayed slightly better, but clinically insignificant, baseline characteristics. After adjusting for the major risk factors in the multivariate regression analysis, robotic versus open surgery was associated with significantly lower odds of mortality for all five major oncological surgeries and with lower odds of intensive care unit admission, transfusion, and length of hospital stay for all six major urological surgeries. Robotic surgery is becoming the mainstay in major urological operations. Patients selected for robotic surgery in Germany presented better perioperative outcomes compared to those operated with an open approach.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
Major urological guidelines do not currently recommend robot-assisted surgery compared with laparoscopic or open surgery due to the lack of high-quality evidence. We aimed to provide real-world data on the evolution of robotic urology and to compare its perioperative outcomes with those of laparoscopic and open surgeries.
METHODS METHODS
We used the GeRmAn Nationwide inpatient Data (GRAND), provided by the Research Data Center of the Federal Bureau of Statistics (2005-2021), and performed multiple patient-level analyses. We included patients undergoing major urological surgeries and report the largest study in the field with 993 276 patients.
KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS UNASSIGNED
An open approach was performed in 733 416 cases, a laparoscopic approach in 109 428, and a robot-assisted approach in 150 432. Overall, 442 811 (45%) patients underwent radical prostatectomy, 129 943 (13%) radical cystectomy, 192 340 (19%) radical nephrectomy, 123 648 (12%) partial nephrectomy, 56 114 (5.6%) nephroureterectomy, and 48 420 (4.9%) pyeloplasty. The number of patients undergoing robot-assisted surgery increased exponentially, while the number of patients undergoing open surgery decreased substantially throughout the past few years. Patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery displayed slightly better, but clinically insignificant, baseline characteristics. After adjusting for the major risk factors in the multivariate regression analysis, robotic versus open surgery was associated with significantly lower odds of mortality for all five major oncological surgeries and with lower odds of intensive care unit admission, transfusion, and length of hospital stay for all six major urological surgeries.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS CONCLUSIONS
Robotic surgery is becoming the mainstay in major urological operations.
PATIENT SUMMARY RESULTS
Patients selected for robotic surgery in Germany presented better perioperative outcomes compared to those operated with an open approach.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39209568
pii: S2405-4569(24)00159-7
doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2024.08.004
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Nikolaos Pyrgidis (N)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: Nikolaos.pyrgidis@med.uni-muenchen.de.

Yannic Volz (Y)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Benedikt Ebner (B)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Thilo Westhofen (T)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Michael Staehler (M)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Michael Chaloupka (M)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Maria Apfelbeck (M)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Friedrich Jokisch (F)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Robert Bischoff (R)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Julian Marcon (J)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Philipp Weinhold (P)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Armin Becker (A)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Christian Stief (C)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Gerald B Schulz (GB)

Department of Urology, University Hospital, LMU, Munich, Germany.

Classifications MeSH