RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The implementation of quality assurance programs (QAPs) within urological practice has gained prominence; yet, their impact on outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP) remains uncertain. This paper aims to systematically review the current literature regarding the implementation of QAPs and their impact on outcomes after robot-assisted RP, laparoscopic RP, and open prostatectomy, collectively referred to as RP. METHODS: A systematic Embase, Medline (OvidSP), and Scopus search was conducted, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) process, on January 12, 2024. Studies were identified and included if these covered implementation of QAPs and their impact on outcomes after RP. QAPs were defined as any intervention seeking quality improvement through critically reviewing, analyzing, and discussing outcomes. Included studies were assessed critically using the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, with results summarized narratively. KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS: Ten included studies revealed two methodological strategies: periodic performance feedback and surgical video assessments. Despite conceptual variability, QAPs improved outcomes consistently (ie, surgical margins, urine continence, erectile function, and hospital readmissions). Of the two strategies, video assessments better identified suboptimal surgical practice and technical errors. Although the extent of quality improvements did not appear to correlate with the frequency of QAPs, there was an apparent correlation with whether or not outcomes were evaluated collectively. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Current findings suggest that QAPs have a positive impact on outcomes after RP. Caution in interpretation due to limited data is advised. More extensive research is required to explore how conceptual differences impact the extent of quality improvements. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this paper, we review the available scientific literature regarding the implementation of quality assurance programs and their impact on outcomes after radical prostatectomy. The included studies offered substantial support for the implementation of quality assurance programs as an incentive to improve the quality of care continuously.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The currently advised follow-up scheme of PSA testing after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is strict and might pose a burden to our healthcare system. We aimed to optimize the 1-year follow-up scheme for patients who undergo RARP. METHODS: All patients with histologically-proven prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent RARP between 2018 and August 2022 in the Prostate Cancer Network in the Netherlands were retrospectively evaluated. We excluded patients who underwent salvage RARP and patients who had <1 year of PSA follow-up. Postoperative PSA values were collected. Biochemical persistence (BCP) was defined as PSA level >0.10 ng/mL at 0-4 months after RARP, whereas biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as PSA level >0.2 ng/mL at any time point after RARP. We aimed to identify a group of patients who had a very low risk of BCR at different time points after surgery. RESULTS: Of all 1155 patients, BCP was observed in 151 (13%), of whom 79 (6.8%) had PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/mL. BCR further developed in 51 (4.7%) and 37 (3.4%) patients at 5-8 and 9-12 months after RARP, respectively. In 12 patients, BCR was found at 5-8 months after RARP in the absence of BCP. These patients represented 1.2% (12/1004) of the entire group. In other words, 98.8% (992/1004) of patients who had an unmeasurable PSA level at 0-4 months after RARP also had an unmeasurable PSA level 5-8 months after surgery. Limitations are the retrospective design and incomplete follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with an unmeasurable PSA level at 3-4 months after RARP may not need to be retested until 12 months of follow-up, as almost 100% of patients will not have the biochemically recurrent disease at 5-8 months of follow-up. This will reduce PSA testing substantially at the cost of hardly any missed patients with recurrent disease.