The Journal of Urology
Volume 183, Issue 4 , Pages 1366-1372, April 2010

Comparative Effectiveness of Prostate Cancer Surgical Treatments: A Population Based Analysis of Postoperative Outcomes

Urology Service, Department of Surgery, Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, and Health Outcomes Research Group, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (EBE, LMJ), Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York

Received 25 July 2009 published online 25 February 2010.

Purpose

Enthusiasm for laparoscopic surgical approaches to prostate cancer treatment has grown despite limited evidence of improved outcomes compared with open radical prostatectomy. We compared laparoscopic prostatectomy with or without robotic assistance vs open radical prostatectomy in terms of postoperative outcomes and subsequent cancer directed therapy.

Materials and Methods

Using a population based cancer registry linked with Medicare claims we identified men 66 years old or older with localized prostate cancer who underwent radical prostatectomy from 2003 to 2005. Outcome measures were general medical/surgical complications and mortality within 90 days after surgery, genitourinary/bowel complications within 365 days, radiation therapy and/or androgen deprivation therapy within 365 days and length of hospital stay.

Results

Of the 5,923 men 18% underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Adjusting for patient and tumor characteristics, there were no differences in the rate of general medical/surgical complications (OR 0.93 95% CI 0.77–1.14) or genitourinary/bowel complications (OR 0.96 95% CI 0.76–1.22), or in postoperative radiation and/or androgen deprivation (OR 0.80 95% CI 0.60–1.08). Laparoscopic prostatectomy was associated with a 35% shorter hospital stay (p <0.0001) and a lower bladder neck/urethral obstruction rate (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58–0.94). In laparoscopic cases surgeon volume was inversely associated with hospital stay and the odds of any genitourinary/bowel complication.

Conclusions

Laparoscopic prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy have similar rates of postoperative morbidity and additional treatment. Men considering prostate cancer surgery should understand the expected benefits and risks of each technique to facilitate decision making and set realistic expectations.

Key Words: prostate, prostatic neoplasms, prostatectomy, surgical procedures, minimally invasive, laparoscopy

Abbreviations and Acronyms: LRP, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, ORP, open retropubic radical prostatectomy, PSA, prostate specific antigen, SEER, Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 30.00 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 Supported by National Institutes of Health 1RC1CA146516-01 (JAE, EBE, WTL, DSY), T32-CA82088 (PTS, WTL), National Cancer Institute P50-CA92629 SPORE (PTS) and CA118189-01A2 (EBE), Sidney Kimmel Center for Prostate and Urologic Cancers, David H. Koch provided through the Prostate Cancer Foundation and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center.

 Supplementary material for this article can be obtained at http://www.mskcc.org/comparative-effectiveness-prostate-cancer/journalofurology.

 For other articles on a related topic see pages 1598 and 1619.

PII: S0022-5347(09)03185-1

doi:10.1016/j.juro.2009.12.021

Refers to article:

  • Screening Agents for Preventive Efficacy in a Bladder Cancer Model: Study Design, End Points, and Gefitinib and Naproxen Efficacy , 22 February 2010

    Ronald A. Lubet, Vernon E. Steele, M. Margaret Juliana, Clinton J. Grubbs
    The Journal of Urology April 2010 (Vol. 183, Issue 4, Pages 1598-1603)

  • Effect of Isocaloric Low Fat Diet on Prostate Cancer Xenograft Progression in a Hormone Deprivation Model , 22 February 2010

    Jessica C. Lloyd, Jodi A. Antonelli, Tameika E. Phillips, Elizabeth M. Masko, Jean-Alfred Thomas, Susan H.M. Poulton, Michael Pollack, Stephen J. Freedland
    The Journal of Urology April 2010 (Vol. 183, Issue 4, Pages 1619-1624)

Refers to erratum:

  • Errata , 23 June 2010

    The Journal of Urology August 2010 (Vol. 184, Issue 2, Page 808)

The Journal of Urology
Volume 183, Issue 4 , Pages 1366-1372, April 2010