Search

Background The rapid adoption of robot-assisted laparoscopy in radical prostatectomy has preceded data regarding associated costs. Qualitative evidence regarding cost outcomes is lacking. Objective This study assessed how costs were affected by robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) compared with open surgery. Design, setting, and participants Cost analysis was based on the dataset of the LAPPRO (Laparoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open) clinical trial, which is a prospective controlled, nonrandomised trial of patients who underwent prostatectomy at 14 centres in Sweden between September 2008 and November 2011. Currently, data are available from a follow-up period of 24 mo. Intervention In the LAPPRO trial, RALP was compared with radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP). Outcome measurements and statistical analysis Costs per surgical technique were assessed based on resource variable data from the LAPPRO database. The calculation of average costs was based on mean values; Swedish currency was converted to purchasing power parity US dollar (PPP$). All tests were two-tailed and conducted at α = 0.05 significance level. Results and limitations The cost analysis comprised 2638 men. Based on the LAPPRO trial data, RALP was associated with an increased cost/procedure of PPP$ 3837 (95% confidence interval: 2747–4928) compared with RRP. The result was sensitive to variations in caseload. Main drivers of overall cost were robotic system cost, operation time, length of stay, and sick leave. Limitations of the study include the uneven distribution between RALP and RRP regarding procedures in public/for-profit hospitals and surgeon/centre procedural volume. Conclusions Based on the LAPPRO trial data, this study showed that RALP was associated with an increased cost compared with RRP in Swedish health care. There are many factors influencing the costs, making the absolute result dependent on the specific setting. However, by identifying the main cost drivers and/or most influential parameters, the study provides support for informed decisions and predictions. Patient summary In this study, we looked at the cost outcome when performing prostatectomies by robot-assisted laparoscopic technique compared with open surgery in Sweden. We found that the robot-assisted procedure was associated with a higher mean cost.

Background Within the last decade, robotically-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has become the standard for treating localized prostate cancer, causing a revival of the 45° Trendelenburg position. In this pilot study we investigated effects of Trendelenburg position on hemodynamics and cerebral oxygenation in patients undergoing RALP. Methods We enrolled 58 patients undergoing RALP and 22 patients undergoing robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) (control group) in our study. Demographic patient data and intraoperative parameters including cerebral oxygenation and cerebral hemodynamics were recorded for all patients. Cerebral function was also assessed pre- and postoperatively via the Mini Mental Status (MMS) exam. Changes in parameters during surgery were modelled by a mixed effects model; changes in the MMS result were evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed rank test. Results Preoperative assessment of patient characteristics, standard blood values and vital parameters revealed no difference between the two groups. Conclusions Applying a 45° Trendelenburg position causes no difference in postoperative brain function, and does not alter cerebral oxygenation during a surgical procedure lasting up to 5 h. Further studies in larger patient cohorts will have to confirm these findings. Trial registration German Clinical Trial Registry; DRKS00005094; Registered 12th December 2013—Retrospectively registered; https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00005094.

Background Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy is increasingly performed as a minimally invasive option for patients with organ-confined prostate cancer. This technique offers several advantages over other surgical methods. However, concerns have been raised over the effects of the steep head-down tilt necessary during the procedure. We present a case in which head-down positioning and abdominal insufflation masked the signs of an intraoperative hemorrhage. Case presentation A 73-year-old Asian man developed severe hypotension caused by an unexpected hemorrhage during robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Although our patient’s blood pressure steadily decreased during the procedure, his systolic blood pressure remained above 80 mmHg while he was tilted head downward at an angle of 28°. However, his blood pressure dropped immediately after he was returned to the horizontal position and abdominal insufflation – to create a pneumoperitoneum – was ceased at the end of surgery. We returned the patient to a head-down tilt to keep his blood pressure stable and began fluid infusion. Blood test results indicated that a hemorrhage was the cause of his hypotension. Open abdominal surgery was performed to stop the bleeding. The surgeons found blood pooling inside his abdomen from a longitudinal cut in a small arterial vessel in his abdominal wall, possibly a branch of his external iliac artery. The surgeons successfully controlled the hemorrhage and our patient was moved to our intensive care unit. Our patient recovered completely over the next few days, without any neurological deficits. Conclusions We suspect that blood began to pool in our patient’s superior abdomen during surgery, and that increased intra-abdominal pressure suppressed the hemorrhage. When our patient was returned to the horizontal position and insufflation of his abdomen was discontinued, the resulting increased rate of hemorrhage caused a sudden drop in blood pressure. Surgeons and anesthesiologists must understand the hemodynamic changes that result from head-down patient positioning and abdominal insufflation.

Studies have reported that early physical rehabilitation after surgical procedures is associated with improved outcome measured as shorter hospital stay and enhanced recovery. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between the preoperative physical activity level and subsequent postoperative complications, sick-leave and hospital stay after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer in the setting of the LAPPRO trial (LAParoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open). LAPPRO is a prospective controlled trial, comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and open surgery for localized prostate cancer between 2008 and 2011. 1569 patients aged 64 or less with an occupation were included in this sub-study. The Gleason score was