Contemporary Rates and Predictors of Open Conversion During Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer

被引:8
|
作者
Luzzago, Stefano [1 ,2 ]
Rosiello, Giuseppe [1 ,3 ]
Pecoraro, Angela [1 ,4 ]
Deuker, Marina [1 ,5 ]
Stolzenbach, Franziska [1 ,6 ]
Mistretta, Francesco Alessandro [1 ,2 ]
Tian, Zhe [1 ]
Musi, Gennaro [2 ]
Montanari, Emanuele [7 ]
Shariat, Shahrokh F. [8 ,9 ,10 ,11 ,12 ]
Saad, Fred [1 ]
Briganti, Alberto [3 ]
de Cobelli, Ottavio [2 ,13 ]
Karakiewicz, Pierre, I [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Montreal, Div Urol, Canc Prognost & Hlth Outcomes Unit, Hlth Ctr, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[2] IRCCS, Dept Urol, European Inst Oncol, Via Giuseppe Ripamonti 435, I-20141 Milan, Italy
[3] IRCCS San Raffaele Sci Inst, Urol Res Inst, Dept Urol, Div Expt Oncol, Milan, Italy
[4] Univ Turin, San Luigi Gonzaga Hosp, Dept Urol, Turin, Italy
[5] Univ Hosp Frankfurt, Dept Urol, Frankfurt, Germany
[6] Univ Med Ctr Hamburg Eppendorf, Martini Klin, Hamburg, Germany
[7] Univ Milan, IRCCS Fdn Ca Granda Osped Maggiore Policlin, Dept Urol, Milan, Italy
[8] Med Univ Vienna, Comprehens Canc Ctr, Dept Urol, Vienna, Austria
[9] Weill Cornell Med Coll, Dept Urol, New York, NY USA
[10] Univ Texas Southwestern, Dept Urol, Dallas, TX USA
[11] Charles Univ Prague, Fac Med 2, Dept Urol, Prague, Czech Republic
[12] IM Sechenov First Moscow State Med Univ, Inst Urol & Reprod Hlth, Moscow, Russia
[13] Univ Milan, Dept Oncol & Hematooncol, Milan, Italy
关键词
National Inpatient Sample; radical prostatectomy; open conversion; obesity; hospital volume; frailty; Charlson comorbidity index; BODY-MASS INDEX; PERIOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; OUTCOMES; PATTERNS; FRAILTY; IMPACT; OBESITY;
D O I
10.1089/end.2020.0074
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: To test contemporary rates and predictors of open conversion at minimally invasive (laparoscopic or robotic) radical prostatectomy (MIRP). Materials and Methods: Within the National Inpatient Sample database (2008-2015), we identified all MIRP patients and patients who underwent open conversion at MIRP. First, estimated annual percentage changes (EAPCs) tested temporal trends of open conversion. Second, multivariable logistic regression models predicted open conversion at MIRP. All models were weighted and adjusted for clustering, as well as all available patient and hospital characteristics. Results: Of 57,078 MIRP patients, 368 (0.6%) underwent open conversion. The rates of open conversion decreased over time (from 1.80% to 0.38%; EAPC: -26.0%; p = 0.003). In multivariable logistic regression models predicting open conversion, patient obesity (odds ratio [OR]: 2.10; p < 0.001), frailty (OR: 1.45; p = 0.005), and Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) >= 2 (OR: 1.57; p = 0.03) achieved independent predictor status. Moreover, compared with high-volume hospitals, medium-volume (OR: 2.03; p < 0.001) and low-volume hospitals (OR: 3.86; p < 0.001) were associated with higher rates of open conversion. Last but not least, when the interaction between the number of patient risk factors (obesity and/or frailty and/or CCI >= 2) and hospital volume was tested, a dose-response effect was observed. Specifically, the rates of open conversion ranged from 0.3% (patients with zero risk factors treated at high-volume hospitals) to 2.2% (patients with two to three risk factors treated at low-volume hospitals). Conclusion: Overall contemporary (2008-2015) rate of open conversion at MIRP was 0.6% and it was strongly associated with patient obesity, frailty, CCI >= 2, and hospital surgical volume. In consequence, these parameters should be taken into account during preoperative patients counseling, as well as in clinical and administrative decision making.
引用
收藏
页码:600 / 607
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Defining predictors of early, intermediate, and late biochemical recurrence in men with clinically localized prostate cancer treated with minimally invasive radical prostatectomy.
    Barreras, Silvia Garcia
    Nunes-Silva, Igor
    Sanchez-Salas, Rafael
    Secin, Fernando P.
    Srougi, Victor
    Baghdadi, Mohammed
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 35 (06)
  • [42] FACTORS ASSOCIATED WITH CONVERSION FROM MINIMALLY INVASIVE TO OPEN SURGERY DURING PARTIAL AND RADICAL NEPHRECTOMY
    Vellos, Ted
    Rosen, Daniel C.
    Paulucci, David J.
    Beksac, Alp T.
    Sfakianos, John P.
    Badani, Ketan K.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2019, 201 (04): : E526 - E527
  • [43] Minimally Invasive Pneumonectomy vs Open Pneumonectomy: Outcomes and Predictors of Conversion
    Shah, Savan K.
    Khan, Arsalan A.
    Basu, Sanjib
    Seder, Christopher W.
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2025, 119 (03): : 634 - 642
  • [44] RISK OF HERNIA COMPLICATIONS AFTER MINIMALLY INVASIVE VERSUS OPEN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Carlsson, Sigrid
    Ehdaie, Behfar
    Atoria, Coral
    Elkin, Elena
    Eastham, James
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2013, 189 (04): : E550 - E550
  • [45] Surgical Complications Requiring Intervention in Open versus Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy
    Haeuser, Lorine
    Reese, Stephen W.
    Paciotti, Marco
    Noldus, Joachim
    Brovman, Ethan Y.
    Urman, Richard D.
    Cone, Eugene B.
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2022, 106 (01) : 51 - 55
  • [46] Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Prostatectomy Editorial Comment
    Walsh, Patrick C.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2010, 183 (06): : 2234 - 2235
  • [47] Re: Risk Of Incisional Hernia After Minimally Invasive and Open Radical Prostatectomy
    Ahlering, Thomas E.
    Morales, Blanca E.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2015, 67 (01) : 172 - 173
  • [48] MINIMALLY INVASIVE RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY HOLD NO ADVANTAGE OVER OPEN RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY WITH REGARD TO COMPLICATION RATES: POPULATION-BASED DATA FROM THE UNITED STATES
    Schmitges, Jan
    Abdollah, Firas
    Sun, Maxine
    Jeldres, Claudio
    Liberman, Daniel
    Djahangirian, Orchidee
    Chun, Felix K.
    Perrotte, Paul
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Haese, Alexander
    Graefen, Markus
    Karakiewicz, Pierre I.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2011, 185 (04): : E263 - E263
  • [49] Pathological Features of Contemporary Radical Prostatectomy Specimens for Prostate Cancer
    Magi-Galluzzi, C.
    Falzarano, S. M.
    Smith, K. Streator
    Klein, E. A.
    Zhou, M.
    MODERN PATHOLOGY, 2011, 24 : 208A - 209A
  • [50] Interval from Prostate Biopsy to Radical Prostatectomy Does Not Affect Immediate Operative Outcomes for Open or Minimally Invasive Approach
    Park, Bumsoo
    Choo, Seol Ho
    Jeon, Hwang Gyun
    Jeong, Byong Chang
    Seo, Seong Il
    Jeon, Seong Soo
    Lee, Hyun Moo
    Choi, Han Yong
    JOURNAL OF KOREAN MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2014, 29 (12) : 1688 - 1693