Avaliação prospectiva de curva de aprendizado da prostatectomia radical laparoscópica assistida por robótica / Prospective evaluation of the learning curve for robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

INTRODUÇÃO: O câncer de próstata é responsável por 15% dos casos novos de câncer que acometem os homens e pela 5ª causa de morte. As técnicas minimamente invasivas, sobretudo a cirurgia robótica tornou-se a técnica comumente empregada nos Estados Unidos. Muitos artigos tentam demonstrar a curva de aprendizado necessária para a estabilização dos resultados, mas a implementação de novas tecnologias passa por diversos desafios, além da avaliação de seus resultados e dos custos, o que em países em desenvolvimento pode ter um importante impacto no sistema de saúde. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a curva de aprendizado da prostatectomia radical laparoscópica robótica assistida (PRRA) para o tratamento do câncer de próstata, de acordo com a continência urinária, a potência sexual, o tempo cirúrgico e o controle oncológico. MÉTODOS: Duzentos pacientes com neoplasia de próstata localizada submetidos à PRRA por um único cirurgião foram divididos em quatro grupos de acordo com a sequência das cirurgias. Foram avaliados os dados intra-operatórios, como: tempo cirúrgico, perda sanguínea estimada e as margens cirúrgicas. Também durante o pósoperatório foram avaliadas a potência (IIEF) e a continência (ICIQ). RESULTADOS: Os pacientes apresentaram idade média de 60,6 anos (59,72-61,61), volume prostático ao toque retal de 40 gramas e valor do PSA 6,95 ng/ml (5,79-8,10) semelhantes em todos os grupos (p > 0,05). A biópsia prostática pré-operatória mostrou diferença no escore de Gleason e no tamanho da próstata, sendo que o escore 6 foi menos frequente no grupo 4, representado por 23 pacientes (46%) e no grupo 1, com 39 pacientes (78%) (p < 0,01). Já o tamanho prostático avaliado pelo USTR foi de 39,6 gramas (29,75-48,7) no grupo 4 e 30,5 gramas (23,0-38,15) no grupo 2. A curva de aprendizado estabelecida demonstrou uma diminuição no tempo cirúrgico de 157 minutos (145-170) no grupo 1, para 132 minutos (119-140) no grupo 2 (p < 0,01). A perda sanguínea estimada também se reduziu...

BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is responsible for 15% of new cases of male cancer and is the fifth leading cause of death. Minimally invasive and mainly, robotic surgery technique became the technique most widely utilized in the United States. Many articles have tried to demonstrate the required learning curve to achieve the plateau. Although, new techniques implementation go through many challenges besides the evaluation of its results, costs also became an issue, which may impact in developing countries health system. OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the learning curve of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for the treatment of prostate cancer, according to continence, potency, surgical time and oncologic control. METHODS: Two hundred patients with localized prostate cancer that underwent RARP by a single surgeon were divided into four groups according to its surgical sequence. Intraoperative data, such as surgical time, estimated blood loss and margins were recorded. Also postoperative functional parameters as continence and potency were gathered using validated questionnaires (ICIQ and IIEF). RESULTS: Patients mean age were 60.6 years (59.72- 61.61), mean prostate volume at digital rectal examination was 40 grams and PSA value 6.95 ng/ml (5.79-8.10) were similar in all groups (p > 0.05). Pre-operative prostate biopsy showed difference in Gleason score and prostate size. Gleason score 6 was less frequent in group 4, 23 patients (46%), than group 1, 39 patients (78%)(p <0.01) and prostate size at TRUS was 39.6 grams (29.75- 48.7) in group 4 and 30.5 grams (23.0- 38.15) in group 2. The established learning curve showed a reduction on surgical time from 157 minutes (145-170) in group 1 to 132 minutes (119-140 min) in group 2 (p < 0.01). The estimated blood loss also decreased almost to half, from 395 ml (250-500) in group 1 to 200 ml (150-250) in group 3 (p < 0.01). Positive margins decreased from 16% to only 8 %, but were statistically similar (p=0.236)....

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: initial experience in Brazil and a review of the literature.

CONTEXT AND PURPOSE: Partial nephrectomy has become the standard of care for renal tumors less than 4 cm in diameter. Controversy still exists, however, regarding the best surgical approach, especially when minimally invasive techniques are taken into account. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN) has emerged as a promising technique that helps surgeons achieve the standards of open partial nephrectomy care while offering a minimally invasive approach. The objective of the present study was to describe our initial experience with robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and extensively review the pertinent literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2009 and February 2010, eight consecutive selected patients with contrast enhancing renal masses observed by CT were submitted to RALPN in a private institution. In addition, we collected information on the patients ' demographics, preoperative tumor characteristics and detailed operative, postoperative and pathological data. In addition, a PubMed search was performed to provide an extensive review of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy literature. RESULTS: Seven patients had RALPN on the left or right sides with no intraoperative complications. One patient was electively converted to a robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. The operative time ranged from 120 to 300 min, estimated blood loss (EBL) ranged from 75 to 400 mL and, in five cases, the warm ischemia time (WIT) ranged from 18 to 32 min. Two patients did not require any clamping. Overall, no transfusions were necessary, and there were no intraoperative complications or adverse postoperative clinical events. All margins were negative, and all patients were disease-free at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is a feasible and safe approach to small renal cortical masses. Further prospective studies are needed to compare open partial nephrectomy with its minimally invasive counterparts.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy: initial experience in Brazil and a review of the literature

CONTEXT AND PURPOSE: Partial nephrectomy has become the standard of care for renal tumors less than 4 cm in diameter. Controversy still exists, however, regarding the best surgical approach, especially when minimally invasive techniques are taken into account. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (RALPN) has emerged as a promising technique that helps surgeons achieve the standards of open partial nephrectomy care while offering a minimally invasive approach. The objective of the present study was to describe our initial experience with robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy and extensively review the pertinent literature. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between August 2009 and February 2010, eight consecutive selected patients with contrast enhancing renal masses observed by CT were submitted to RALPN in a private institution. In addition, we collected information on the patients' demographics, preoperative tumor characteristics and detailed operative, postoperative and pathological data. In addition, a PubMed search was performed to provide an extensive review of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy literature. RESULTS: Seven patients had RALPN on the left or right sides with no intraoperative complications. One patient was electively converted to a robotic-assisted radical nephrectomy. The operative time ranged from 120 to 300 min, estimated blood loss (EBL) ranged from 75 to 400 mL and, in five cases, the warm ischemia time (WIT) ranged from 18 to 32 min. Two patients did not require any clamping. Overall, no transfusions were necessary, and there were no intraoperative complications or adverse postoperative clinical events. All margins were negative, and all patients were disease-free at the 6-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is a feasible and safe approach to small renal cortical masses.Further prospective studies are needed to compare open partial nephrectomy with its minimally invasive counterparts.

Surgical performance during laparoscopic radical nephrectomy is improved with training in a porcine model.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Becoming proficient in laparoscopic surgery is dependent on the acquisition of specialized skills that can only be obtained from specific training. This training could be achieved in various ways using inanimate models, animal models, or live patient surgery--each with its own pros and cons. Currently, there are substantial data that support the benefits of animal model training in the initial learning of laparoscopy. Nevertheless, whether these benefits extent themselves to moderately experienced surgeons is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to determine if training using a porcine model results in a quantifiable gain in laparoscopic skills for moderately experienced laparoscopic surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six urologists with some laparoscopic experience were asked to perform a radical nephrectomy weekly for 10 weeks in a porcine model. The procedures were recorded, and surgical performance was assessed by two experienced laparoscopic surgeons using a previously published surgical performance assessment tool. The obtained data were then submitted to statistical analysis. RESULTS: With training, blood loss was reduced approximately 45% when comparing the averages of the first and last surgical procedures (P=0.006). Depth perception showed an improvement close to 35% (P=0.041), and dexterity showed an improvement close to 25% (P=0.011). Total operative time showed trends of improvement, although it was not significant (P=0.158). Autonomy, efficiency, and tissue handling were the only aspects that did not show any noteworthy change (P=0.202, P=0.677, and P=0.456, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that there are quantifiable gains in laparoscopic skills obtained from training in an animal model. Our results suggest that these benefits also extend to more advanced stages of the learning curve, but it is unclear how far along the learning curve training with animal models provides a clear benefit for the performance of laparoscopic procedures. Future studies are necessary to confirm these findings and better understand the impact of this learning tool on surgical practice.