Quantifying the "Assistant Effect" in Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP): Measures of Technical Performance.

PURPOSE: Surgeons are reliant on the bedside assistant during robotic surgeries. Using a modified global rating scale (GRS), we aim to assess the association between an assistant's technical skill on surgeon performance in Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP). METHODS: Prospective, intraoperative video from RARP cases at three centers were collected. Baseline demographic and RARP-experience data were collected from participating surgeons and trainees. The dissection of the prostatic pedicle and neurovascular bundle step (NVB) was analyzed. Expert analysts scored the console surgeon performance using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS), and the bedside assistant performance using a modified Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (aOSATS). The primary outcome is the association between console surgeon performance, as measured by GEARS, and assistant skill, as measured by aOSATS. Spearman's rho correlations were used to test the relationship between assistant and surgeon technical performance, and a multivariable linear regression model was created to test this association while controlling for patient factors. RESULTS: 92 RARP cases were available for the analysis, comprising 14 console surgeons and 22 different bedside assistants. In only 5 (5.4%) cases, the neurovascular bundle step was completed by a trainee, and in 13 (14.1%) of cases, a staff-level surgeon acted as the bedside assistant. aOSATS score was significantly associated with robotic console experience (P = 0.011), and prior laparoscopic experience (P < 0.001). Assistant aOSATS score showed a weak but significant correlation with surgeon GEARS score during the neurovascular bundle step (spearman's rho = 0.248, P = 0.028). On linear regression, aOSATS remained a significant predictor of console surgeon performance (P = 0.016), after controlling for patient age and BMI, prostate volume, tumor stage, and presence of nerve-sparing. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to assess the association between assistant technical skill and surgeon performance in RARP. Additionally, we have provided validity evidence for a modified OSATS global rating scale for training and assessing bedside assistant performance.

Objective assessment of intraoperative skills for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): results from the ERUS Scientific and Educational Working Groups Metrics Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and seek consensus from procedure experts on the metrics that best characterise a reference robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and determine if the metrics distinguished between the objectively assessed RARP performance of experienced and novice urologists, as identifying objective performance metrics for surgical training in robotic surgery is imperative for patient safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In Study 1, the metrics, i.e. 12 phases of the procedure, 81 steps, 245 errors and 110 critical errors for a reference RARP were developed and then presented to an international Delphi panel of 19 experienced urologists. In Study 2, 12 very experienced surgeons (VES) who had performed >500 RARPs and 12 novice urology surgeons performed a RARP, which was video recorded and assessed by two experienced urologists blinded as to subject and group. Percentage agreement between experienced urologists for the Delphi meeting and Mann-Whitney U- and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for construct validation of the newly identified RARP metrics. RESULTS: At the Delphi panel, consensus was reached on the appropriateness of the metrics for a reference RARP. In Study 2, the results showed that the VES performed ~4% more procedure steps and made 72% fewer procedure errors than the novices (P = 0.027). Phases VIIa and VIIb (i.e. neurovascular bundle dissection) best discriminated between the VES and novices. LIMITATIONS: VES whose performance was in the bottom half of their group demonstrated considerable error variability and made five-times as many errors as the other half of the group (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The international Delphi panel reached high-level consensus on the RARP metrics that reliably distinguished between the objectively scored procedure performance of VES and novices. Reliable and valid performance metrics of RARP are imperative for effective and quality assured surgical training.

Multi-Institutional Assessment of Routine Same Day Discharge Surgery for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: We assessed the multi-institutional safety of same day discharge for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy within a single health care system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included 358 patients undergoing planned same day discharge for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy at 6 French centers. Primary outcomes were same day discharge failure, and 30-day complication and readmission rates. Secondary outcomes included preoperative characteristics, perioperative parameters, Chung score and pain visual analogue scale at discharge, pathological features and followup. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 64.7 years. Mean operative time and blood loss were 147.5 minutes and 228 ml, respectively. Concomitant lymph node dissection and nerve sparing procedures were performed in 43% and 62% of cases, respectively. No patient required transfusion or conversion. The same day discharge failure, complication and readmission rates were 4.2%, 16.8% and 2.8%, respectively. The most frequent complications were low grade complications including urinary infection (6.4%) and ileus (2.8%). Blood loss, lymph node dissection and pain visual analogue scale were significantly correlated with same day discharge failure. Same day discharge failure was reported in 7.8% of patients with pelvic lymph node dissection compared with only 1.5% of patients who did not undergo lymph node dissection (p=0.003). ASA® score was the only factor significantly associated with postoperative complications (p=0.023). The only factor correlated with readmission was the pain visual analogue scale at discharge (p=0.017). CONCLUSIONS: This first multi-institutional evaluation confirms the safety of same day discharge robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a single health care system and identifies for the first time factors associated with same day discharge failure and readmission. These findings may help physicians anticipate ideal same day discharge candidates and adapt postoperative followup.

Undertreatment of High-Risk Localized Prostate Cancer in the California Latino Population.

Background: The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology recommend definitive therapy for all men with high-risk localized prostate cancer (PCa) who have a life expectancy >5 years or who are symptomatic. However, the application of these guidelines may vary among ethnic groups. We compared receipt of guideline-concordant treatment between Latino and non-Latino white men in California. Methods: California Cancer Registry data were used to identify 2,421 Latino and 8,636 non-Latino white men diagnosed with high-risk localized PCa from 2010 through 2014. The association of clinical and sociodemographic factors with definitive treatment was examined using logistic regression, overall and by ethnicity. Results: Latinos were less likely than non-Latino whites to receive definitive treatment before (odds ratio [OR], 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.88) and after adjusting for age and tumor characteristics (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75-0.95). Additional adjustment for sociodemographic factors eliminated the disparity. However, the association with treatment differed by ethnicity for several factors. Latino men with no health insurance were considerably less likely to receive definitive treatment relative to insured Latino men (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.23-0.49), an association that was more pronounced than among non-Latino whites (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.47-0.83). Intermediate-versus high-grade disease was associated with lower odds of definitive treatment in Latinos (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.97) but not non-Latino whites. Younger age and care at NCI-designated Cancer Centers were significantly associated with receipt of definitive treatment in non-Latino whites but not in Latinos. Conclusions: California Latino men diagnosed with localized high-risk PCa are at increased risk for undertreatment. The observed treatment disparity is largely explained by sociodemographic factors, suggesting it may be ameliorated through targeted outreach, such as that aimed at younger and underinsured Latino men.

Crowdsourced versus expert evaluations of the vesico-urethral anastomosis in the robotic radical prostatectomy: is one superior at discriminating differences in automated performance metrics?

Crowdsourcing from the general population is an efficient, inexpensive method of surgical performance evaluation. In this study, we compared the discriminatory ability of experts and crowdsourced evaluators (the Crowd) to detect differences in robotic automated performance metrics (APMs). APMs (instrument motion tracking and events data directly from the robot system) of anterior vesico-urethral anastomoses (VUAs) of robotic radical prostatectomies were captured by the dVLogger (Intuitive Surgical). Crowdsourced evaluators and four expert surgeons evaluated video footage using the Global Evaluative Assessment of Robotic Skills (GEARS) (individual domains and total score). Cases were then stratified into performance groups (high versus low quality) for each evaluator based on GEARS. APMs from each group were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test. 25 VUAs performed by 11 surgeons were evaluated. The Crowd displayed moderate correlation with averaged expert scores for all GEARS domains (r > 0.58, p < 0.01). Bland-Altman analysis showed a narrower total GEARS score distribution by the Crowd compared to experts. APMs compared amongst performance groups for each evaluator showed that through GEARS scoring, the most common differentiated metric by evaluators was the velocity of the dominant instrument arm. The Crowd outperformed two out of four expert evaluators by discriminating differences in three APMs using total GEARS scores. The Crowd assigns a narrower range of GEARS scores compared to experts but maintains overall agreement with experts. The discriminatory ability of the Crowd at discerning differences in robotic movements (via APMs) through GEARS scoring is quite refined, rivaling that of expert evaluators.

Influence of Age on Guideline-Concordant Cancer Care for Elderly Patients in the United States.

PURPOSE: To examine the frequency of guideline-concordant cancer care in elderly patients, including "older" elderly (age ≥80 years). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare dataset in patients aged ≥66 years diagnosed with nonmetastatic breast cancer (n=55,094), non-small cell lung (NSCLC) (n=36,203), or prostate cancer (n=86,544) from 2006 to 2011, chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation (RT) treatments were identified using claims. Pearson χ2 tested associations between age and guideline concordance. RESULTS: Older patients were less likely to receive guideline-concordant curative treatment: in stage III breast cancer, receipt of postmastectomy RT (70%, 46%, and 21% in patients aged 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years, respectively; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, RT or surgery (89%, 80%, and 64% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage III NSCLC, RT or surgery plus chemotherapy (79%, 58%, and 27% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in intermediate/high-risk prostate cancer, RT or prostatectomy (projected life expectancy >10 years: 85% and 82% in age 66-69 and 70-75 years; and ≤10 years: 70%, 42%, and 9% in age 76-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). However, older patients were more likely to receive guideline-concordant de-intensified treatment: in stage I to II node-negative breast cancer, hypofractionated postlumpectomy RT (9%, 16%, and 23% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, observation after lumpectomy (12%, 42%, and 84% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); in stage I NSCLC, stereotactic body RT instead of surgery (7%, 16%, and 25% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001); and in lower-risk prostate cancer, no active treatment (25%, 54%, and 68% in age 66-79, 80-89, and ≥90 years; P<.0001). CONCLUSION: Actual treatment of older elderly cancer patients frequently diverged from guidelines, especially in curative treatment of advanced disease. Results suggest a need for better metrics than existing guidelines alone to evaluate quality and appropriateness of care in this population.

Development and Validation of an Objective Scoring Tool for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Prostatectomy Assessment and Competency Evaluation.

PURPOSE: Comprehensive training and skill acquisition by urological surgeons are vital to optimize surgical outcomes and patient safety. We sought to develop and validate PACE (Prostatectomy Assessment and Competence Evaluation), an objective and procedure specific tool to assess the quality of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Development and content validation of PACE was performed by deconstructing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy into 7 key domains utilizing the Delphi methodology. Reliability and construct validation were then assessed using de-identified videos performed by practicing surgeons and fellows. Consensus for each domain was defined as achieving a content validity index of 0.75 or greater. Reliability was assessed by the intraclass correlation and construct validation using a mixed linear model accounting for multiple ratings on the same video. RESULTS: After 3 rounds consensus was reached on wording, relevance of the skills assessed and concordance between the score assigned and the skill assessed. An intraclass correlation of 0.4 or greater was achieved for all domains. The expert group outperformed trainees in all domains but reached statistical significance in bladder drop (4.5 vs 3.4, p = 0.002), preparation of the prostate (4.4 vs 3.2, p <0.0001), seminal vesicle and posterior plane dissection (8.3 vs 6.8, p = 0.03), and neurovascular bundle preservation (4.1 vs 2.4, p <0.0001). Limitations included the lack of assessment of other key skills such as communication and decision making. CONCLUSIONS: PACE is a structured, procedure specific and reliable tool that objectively measures surgical performance during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. It can differentiate different levels of expertise and provide structured feedback to customize training and surgical quality improvement.

Initiation of robot-assisted radical prostatectomies in Finland: Impact on centralization and quality of care.

Objective The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of introduction of robot-assisted prostate surgery and its quality measures in Finland from 2008 to 2012. Materials and methods Registry data were collected for time trends and national distribution of prostate cancer surgery in Finland, while preoperative, operative and follow-up data were collected for quality measures. Results The number and proportion of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (RALPs) increased rapidly and they accounted for 68% of all radical prostatectomies in 2012. The number of centers performing prostatectomies diminished from 25 to 20 at the expense of low-volume centers. In total, 1996 patients were operated on in the four RALP centers in 2008-2012. As anticipated, the learning curve was uniform between the centers, as were mean blood loss (212 ml), hospitalization (1.8 days) and catheterization times (10.6 days). At 3 and 12 months, 49.4% and 71.2% of patients, respectively, were totally continent (no pads). After unilateral nerve-sparing surgery, 9.9% and 5.1% had partial or normal erection at 3 months postoperatively and 14.8% and 20.4% at 12 months, respectively. If bilateral nerve sparing was done, the figures were 13.0% and 13.5% at 3 months and 14.6% and 34.9% at 12 months. Clavien-Dindo grade 3, 4 or 5 complications were seen in 0.3%, 0.3% and 0.1% of patients, respectively. Limitations of the study include non-standardized collection of outcome parameters. Conclusions This report shows that the main impact of adoption of RALP on a national level was rapid spontaneous centralization of prostate cancer surgery. The main advantages of minimally invasive prostatectomy, i.e. low blood loss and short hospitalization, are easily achieved, while continuous effort is necessary for improvements in surgical outcomes.

Supervisor volume affects oncological outcomes of trainees performing open radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between biochemical failure (BF) rate and surgeon experience following open radical prostatectomy (ORP) has been well established, but BF when ORP is performed by urology trainees who are supervised by urologists of differing volume has not. We aimed to compare the oncological outcomes from ORP when a urology trainee as primary operator and is supervised by a high- or low-volume consultant urologist. METHODS: Using a centralized whole of population dataset, created through the Victorian Radical Prostatectomy Registry, patients were classified as either those where a consultant was the primary operator, a urology trainee was the primary operator and supervised by a high-volume consultant or those where a urology trainee was supervised by a low-volume consultant. BF- and prostate cancer (PCa)-specific mortality was compared between these latter two groups and the consultant-only group. RESULTS: We found BF- and PCa-specific mortality rate to be poorer when ORP was performed by a urology trainee supervised by a low-volume consultant compared with consultant-led surgery (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.33, P = 0.022; subhazard ratio (SHR) = 2.31, P = 0.010, respectively). When a urology trainee, as primary operator, was supervised by a high-volume consultant, there was no statistical difference in BF- or PCa-specific mortality rate following ORP compared with consultant-led surgery (HR = 1.19, P = 0.234; SHR = 1.53, P = 0.346, respectively). There was a trend evident with decreasing supervisor volume leading to worse oncological and mortality outcomes for trainee-led cases. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the value of high-volume and fellowship-trained urologists in performing and teaching ORP. As outcomes are increasingly scrutinized with audits, the best strategy for clinicians to maintain standards and optimal patient outcomes is to understand these elements and direct trainees to appropriate centres for training and fellowships.

Population-Based Assessment of Determining Treatments for Prostate Cancer.

IMPORTANCE: Many men with indolent prostate cancer often opt for radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy treatment for their disease. These men may experience considerable detriments of quality of life owing to sexual, urinary, and/or rectal toxic effects associated with these treatments. Without a better understanding of the mutable agents and predictors of treatment types, diffusion of expectant management among these men will be slow. OBJECTIVE: To determine population-based predictors for treatment and use of watchful waiting or active surveillance for indolent prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We used Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked data. A total of 37,621 men in the general community diagnosed as having prostate cancer from 2004 to 2007 were followed until December 31, 2009. EXPOSURES: Watchful waiting or active surveillance, radiation therapy, or radical prostatectomy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: We used mixed-effects logistic regression analysis to determine the factors associated with aggressive treatment and use of watchful waiting or active surveillance for men with prostate cancer. RESULTS: The most common treatment type is radiation therapy (57.9% [95% CI, 57.4%-58.4%]), followed by radical prostatectomy (19.1% [95% CI, 18.7%-19.5%]) and watchful waiting or active surveillance (9.6% [95% CI, 9.3%-9.9%]). Moreover, patients and providers significantly integrate age (odds ratio [OR], 0.32 [95% CI, 0.29-0.35]) and comorbidities (OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.56-0.68]) when determining radical prostatectomy, while regional variation (OR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.47-0.68]) and referral patterns (OR, 44.46 [95% CI, 41.04-48.17]) influence the use of radiation therapy. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics significantly account for 40% of patients undergoing prostatectomy, 12% choosing watchful waiting or active surveillance, and only 3% undergoing radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: There is increased use of radiotherapy among patients with indolent prostate cancer with limited to no correlation with tumor biology. Active surveillance was underused, and a significant proportion of the variance was unexplained. Further research into qualitatively describing the contributing factors that drive decision-making recommendations for prostate cancer patients is needed.

Achieving Quality Assurance of Prostate Cancer Surgery During Reorganisation of Cancer Services.

BACKGROUND: National Health Service England recently oversaw a whole-scale reconfiguration of cancer services in London, UK, for a number of different cancer pathways. Centralisation of cancer surgery has occurred with prostate cancer (PCa) surgery only being commissioned at a single designated pelvic cancer surgical centre. This process has required surgeons to work in teams providing a hub-and-spoke model of care. OBJECTIVE: To report the extent to which the initiation of a quality assurance programme (QAP) can improve the quality of PCa surgical care during reorganisation of cancer services in London. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A pre- and postintervention study was initiated with 732 men undergoing robot-assisted radical PCa surgery over a 3-yr period, 396 men before the introduction of the QAP and 336 afterwards. INTERVENTION: Image-based surgical planning of cancer surgery and monthly peer review of individual surgeon outcomes incorporating rating and assessment of edited surgical video clips. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We observed margin status (positive/negative), complication rate of surgery, 3-mo urinary continence, use of nerve-sparing surgery, and potency at 12 mo after surgery. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to compare outcomes before and after initiation of the QAP. Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the return of potency over time. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Demographics of patients undergoing surgery did not change following the reorganisation of cancer services. Patient-reported 3-mo urinary continence improved following the initiation of the QAP, both in terms of requirement for incontinence pads (57% continent vs 67% continent; odds ratio [OR]: 2.19; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-4.46; p=0.02) and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire score (5.6 vs 4.2; OR: 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70-0.95; p=0.009). Concurrently, use of nerve-sparing surgery increased significantly (OR: 2.99; 95% CI, 2.14-4.20; p<0.001) while margin status remained static. Potency at 12 mo increased significantly from 21% to 61% in those patients undergoing bilateral nerve-sparing surgery (hazard ratio: 3.58; 95% CI, 1.29-9.87; p=0.04). Interaction was noted between surgeon and 3-mo urinary continence. On regression analysis, incontinence scores improved significantly for all but one surgeon who had low incontinence rates at study initiation. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of a QAP improved quality of care in terms of consistency of patient selection and outcomes of surgery during a period of major reorganisation of cancer services in London. The QAP framework presented could be adopted by other organisations providing complex surgical care across a large network of referring hospitals. PATIENT SUMMARY: The introduction of a quality assurance programme improved the quality of prostate cancer care in terms of consistency of patient selection and outcomes of surgery during a period of major reorganisation of cancer services.

[Robotic surgery in the Netherlands: lack of high-quality proof of efficacy]. / Robotchirurgie in Nederland: hoogwaardig bewijs voor effectiviteit ontbreekt.

More than 10 years after its first introduction, robot-assisted surgery is now performed in 17 Dutch hospitals. Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is the most frequently performed, though its clinical superiority compared to open (RRP) and laparoscopic prostatectomy (LRP) has not been demonstrated. One randomized controlled trial showed better outcome in erectile function after RARP compared to LRP. The quality of the other studies into RARP is too limited to draw reliable conclusions on clinically relevant outcome measures such as survival, disease-free survival and quality of life. Given the high costs and small scientific evidence, the introduction of robotic surgery has been irresponsibly quick. Better scientific research of robotic surgery is needed before this technology can be broadly applied in clinical practice.

The impact of surgical experience on total hospital charges for minimally invasive prostatectomy: a population-based study.

OBJECTIVE: • To evaluate the relationship between surgical volume (SV) and total hospital charges in patients undergoing minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) for treatment of localized prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: • Within the Florida Hospital Inpatient Datafile, 2666 men who were treated with MIRP for prostate cancer between 2002-2008 were identified. • The SV was defined in two ways: annual caseload (AC) and each surgeons experience (SE) defined as the total number of procedures performed since entering the study until the time of each MIRP. RESULTS: • The mean and median charges were respectively 38,852 and 31,511 US Dollars. AC ranged from 1-171 and SE varied from 1-500. Overall, 75.7 to 94% of surgeons were in the lowest AC tertile and 27 to 66% of patients were operated by low AC tertile surgeons. • After stratification according to AC tertiles, median charges were 41,564; 33,395 and 26,608 US Dollar for respectively low intermediate and high AC tertile categories. • Multivariable logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations revealed that the probability of charges above the median was reduced by respectively 38 and 68% in patients operated by intermediate SE (17-76 MIRPs) or high SE tertile (≥ 77 MIRPs) surgeons vs. low SE tertile (≤ 16 MIRPs) surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: • High surgical experience reduces MIRP total hospital charges. • Despite this observation, even in 2008, 82% of MIRP surgeons were in the lowest AC tertile and contributed to 32% of all MIRPs.

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: transfer validity.

OBJECTIVES: The impact of a formal fellowship training program on the independent practice of the trainees (i.e. transfer validity) has not been evaluated. We analyzed the transfer validity of a structured curriculum in an in-door as well as an out-door setting. METHODS: After completing their training, two fourth generation laparoscopic surgeons who started at the same time compared operative parameters and oncological outcomes in their independent practice, prospectively analyzing the next 100 patients in each. One surgeon continued laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in the same center of excellence (Group-In), whereas the other implemented the procedure in a separate academic center (Group-Out). RESULTS: The demographics for both groups (Group-In vs Group-Out) were similar regarding age, prostate volume and preoperative prostate-specific antigen levels. Mean operation times (214.8 vs 224.2 min; P = 0.494) and estimated blood loss (472.4 vs 402.6 mL; P = 0.109) did not differ significantly in both groups as well as complication rate (20 vs 24%), median catheter time (8 vs 8.5 days) and continence rates at 12 months (95 vs 95.5%). According to the pathological stages, the rates of positive surgical margins were similar for pT2 (3.2 vs 4.3%) and pT3 (42.8 vs 45.2%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With a well designed, long-term preclinical and clinical fellowship training program, LRP techniques can be efficiently transferred from the center of excellence to other centers with no significant impact on surgical, functional and oncological outcomes.

[Effectiveness, variation and inequalities. Hysterectomies and prostatectomies due to neoplasm in Spain (2002-2004)]. / Variabilidad, efectividad y desigualdad: Histerectomías y prostatectomías por enfermedad neoplásica en España (2002-2004).

BACKGROUND: Debates about equity in the utilization of health services often omit whether inequalities are observed in effective and safe procedures or they are experienced in treatments dubiously effective. This work tries to illustrate the difference between inequality and inequity in the health services research field. METHODS: Ecologic study on the standardized rates of surgical interventions in uterus and prostate cancer, produced between 2002 and 2004 in 180 healthcare areas in Spain. Socioeconomic variables: public beds per 100,000 inh, economic level, unemployment rate (population between 25 and 49), bank offices per 1,000 inh., and proportion of illiterate or persons with no studies. To estimate inequality statistics for Small Area Analysis were used; to determine the effect of socioeconomic factors, ANOVA and Linear Multiple Regression were modelled. RESULTS: 12,178 admissions for hysterectomy (2.19 per 10,000 women) and 13,416 prostatectomies (2.47 per 10,000 men) were analysed. All the statistics showed higher variation (inequality) in prostate cancer. Hysterectomy rates were not related with socioeconomic factors as oppose as prostatectomy: higher rates were related with living in areas with bigger centres (beta=0.89, p <0.001), with more economic level (beta=0.72, p=0.004) and less rate of illiterate persons (with regard to the tertile, betat2 = 0.75, p=0,002; betat3 = 0.57, p=0,044). CONCLUSION: Inequalities in the utilization of healthcare services do not necessarily imply inequity. In prostatectomy due to prostate cancer, an uncertain procedure in terms of effectiveness, the observed inequalities against poorer areas, should not be interpreted as a symptom of inequity.

Performance and functional outcome of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy in relation to obesity: an assessment of 500 patients.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the impact of obesity on the performance and functional outcome of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively examined 500 patients treated with EERPE; they were categorized into three groups according to the World Health Organization classification of obesity: normal weight (body mass index, BMI, <25.0 kg/m(2)), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m(2)) and obese (30.0 kg/m(2)). The database of our institution was reviewed and perioperative data evaluated. The functional data were collected through questionnaires before and after EERPE and analysed statistically. RESULTS: The age, prostate size and preoperative PSA level were similar in all three groups. The mean (sd) BMI was 27 (3.3) kg/m(2), with 26.8%, 56.6% and 16.6% of the patients classed as normal, overweight and obese, respectively. A pelvic lymph node dissection and nerve-sparing was done in 218 and 123 patients, respectively. There was no statistically significance difference in the number of patients in each group who had previous procedures. Obese patients had a significantly higher American Society of Anesthesiologists score. The mean operative duration for all patients was 149 min; there was a statistically significant difference in duration among the three groups, with EERPE or nerve-sparing EERPE requiring a mean of 20 min more in obese patients. There was no conversion to open surgery. The estimated mean blood loss was 200 mL; four patients, none of them in the obese group, received a blood transfusion. At 3 months after EERPE there was a trend to worse continence in obese patients, but it was not statistically significant, and was not apparent at 6 months. There was no difference in transfusion rate and duration of catheterization. CONCLUSION: EERPE seems to be a feasible and reproducible surgical technique in obese patients, although the operation takes longer.

Facilitating Clinical Outcomes Assessment through the automated identification of quality measures for prostate cancer surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The College of American Pathologists (CAP) Category 1 quality measures, tumor stage, Gleason score, and surgical margin status, are used by physicians and cancer registrars to categorize patients into groups for clinical trials and treatment planning. This study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of an application designed to automatically extract these quality measures from the postoperative pathology reports of patients having undergone prostatectomies for treatment of prostate cancer. DESIGN: An application was developed with the Clinical Outcomes Assessment Toolkit that uses an information pipeline of regular expressions and support vector machines to extract CAP Category 1 quality measures. System performance was evaluated against a gold standard of 676 pathology reports from the University of California at Los Angeles Medical Center and Brigham and Women's Hospital. To evaluate the feasibility of clinical implementation, all pathology reports were gathered using administrative codes with no manual preprocessing of the data performed. MEASUREMENTS: The sensitivity, specificity, and overall accuracy of system performance were measured for all three quality measures. Performance at both hospitals was compared, and a detailed failure analysis was conducted to identify errors caused by poor data quality versus system shortcomings. RESULTS: Accuracies for Gleason score were 99.7%, tumor stage 99.1%, and margin status 97.2%, for an overall accuracy of 98.67%. System performance on data from both hospitals was comparable. Poor clinical data quality led to a decrease in overall accuracy of only 0.3% but accounted for 25.9% of the total errors. CONCLUSION: Despite differences in document format and pathologists' reporting styles, strong system performance indicates the potential of using a combination of regular expressions and support vector machines to automatically extract CAP Category 1 quality measures from postoperative prostate cancer pathology reports.

[Radical prostatectomy: open, laparoscopic and robotic. Looking for a new gold standard?]. / Prostatectomia radical abierta, laparoscópica y robótica: En busca de un nuevo gold standard?

INTRODUCTION: It is well known that radical prostatectomy (RP) is an excellent option in localized prostatic cancer especially from oncological control point of view. The efforts, during last decades, of the urological community in this field have been addressed in trying to improve functional outcomes (urinary and sexual morbidity) after the procedure. From the beginning of this century, three managements (open, robotic and laparoscopic) have been coexisting trying to get and prove the best results. The objective of this review has been to make the most exhaustive, rigorous and objective updating with the functional and oncological outcomes from the three (RP) techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We have centered the comparison in four sections: perioperative, oncological outcomes, functional results and economic costs. With this purpose a systematic search was made in the following registers: PubMed, OVID, EMBASE and Cochrane Library, with the following terms: Retropubic RP. open RP, laparoscopic RP, robotic RP, Sexual function, urinary incontinence, quality of life, economic costs. At author's criteria, a total of 73 references were selected, that were individually analyzed. RESULTS: Whatever the technique is, the mortality related to the procedure is extremely low, with little postoperative pain and minimum analgesic requirements. The oncological results are similar, measured in surgical margin terms: Open RP (14-20%), Laparoscopic RP (7.4-21.9%) and robotic RP (5.7-17.3%). Concerning functional results (sexual function and urinary continence), it is difficult to establish comparisons due to the multitude of existing byas (non randomized studies, different methods and measurement scales, different definitions, etc.) In the uni-insitutional studies, results seem to be equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic and robotic RP series are still pending of mature outcomes, related to long term biochemical control and functional results. It seems that with these managements, blood loss and transfusion needs are minor compared to open surgery. Robotic technology adds very interesting advantages that could have an important role in homogenize the minimally invasive management, but are still pending of validation at medium and long term.