The Impact of Implementation of the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel Recommendations on Reporting and Grading Complications on Perioperative Outcomes after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

被引:55
|
作者
Gandaglia, Giorgio [1 ]
Bravi, Carlo Andrea [1 ,2 ]
Dell'Oglio, Paolo [1 ,2 ]
Mazzone, Elio [1 ,2 ]
Fossati, Nicola [1 ]
Scuderi, Simone [1 ,2 ]
Robesti, Daniele [1 ,2 ]
Barletta, Francesco [1 ,2 ]
Grillo, Luca [1 ,2 ]
Maclennan, Steven [3 ]
N'Dow, James [3 ]
Montorsi, Francesco [1 ,2 ]
Briganti, Alberto [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] IRCCS Osped San Raffaele, URI, Unit Urol, Div Oncogen, Milan, Italy
[2] Univ Vita Salute San Raffaele, Milan, Italy
[3] Univ Aberdeen, Acad Urol Unit, Aberdeen, Scotland
关键词
Complications; EAU guidelines; Perioperative outcomes; Radical prostatectomy; Readmission; CLASSIFICATION; CANCER;
D O I
10.1016/j.eururo.2018.02.025
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
The rate of postoperative complications might vary according to the method used to collect perioperative data. We aimed at assessing the impact of the prospective implementation of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on reporting and grading of complications in prostate cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). From September 2016, an integrated method for reporting surgical morbidity based on the EAU guidelines was implemented at a single, tertiary center. Perioperative data were prospectively and systematically collected during a patient interview at 30 d after surgery as recommended by the EAU Guidelines Panel Recommendations on Reporting and Grading Complications. The rate and grading of complications of 167 patients who underwent RARP +/- pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) after the implementation of the prospective collection system (Group 1) were compared with 316 patients treated between January 2015 and August 2016 (Group 2) when a system based on patient chart review was used. No differences were observed in disease characteristics and PLND between the two groups (all p >= 0.1). Postoperative complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Overall, the complication rate was higher when the prospective collection system based on the EAU guidelines was used (29%) than when retrospective chart review (10%; p < 0.001) was used. In particular, a substantially higher rate of grade 1 (8.4% vs 4.7%) and 2 (14% vs 2.8%) complications was detected in Group 1 versus Group 2 (p < 0.001). Although the rate of complications occurred during hospitalization did not differ (13% vs 10%; p = 0.3), 31 (19%) complications after discharge were detected in Group 1. This resulted into a readmission rate of 16%. Conversely, no complications after discharge and readmissions were recorded for Group 2. The implementation of the EAU guidelines on reporting perioperative outcomes roughly doubled the complication rate after RARP and allowed for the detection of complications after discharge in more than 15% of patients that would have been otherwise missed, where patients assessed with the EAU implemented protocol had a threefold higher likelihood of reporting complications. Patient summary: The implementation of the European Association of Urology guidelines on reporting and grading of complications after urologic procedures in prostate cancer patients roughly doubled the complication rate after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared to retrospective patient chart review. Moreover, it allowed for the detection of complications after discharge in more than 15% of patients that would have been otherwise missed. (C) 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:4 / 7
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] SURGICAL SKILL AND PATIENT OUTCOMES AFTER ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Peabody, James O.
    Dunn, Rodney L.
    Brachulis, Andrew
    Kim, Tae
    Linsell, Susan
    Lane, Brian R.
    Sarle, Richard
    Montie, James
    Miller, David C.
    Ghani, Khurshid R.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 197 (04): : E1129 - E1129
  • [42] Oncologic and functional outcomes after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
    Drouin, S. -J.
    Vaessen, C.
    Misrai, V.
    Ferhi, K.
    Bitker, M. -O.
    Chartier-Kastler, E.
    Haertig, A.
    Richard, F.
    Roupret, M.
    PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2009, 19 (03): : 158 - 164
  • [43] SURGEON PERCEPTION IS NOT A GOOD PREDICTOR OF PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES IN ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY (RARP)
    Sharma, S.
    Stern, J.
    Meredith, B.
    Nguyen, M.
    Schwab, C.
    Lee, D.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2009, 23 : A112 - A113
  • [44] Interval from prostate biopsy to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: effects on perioperative outcomes
    Martin, George L.
    Nunez, Rafael N.
    Humphreys, Mitchell D.
    Martin, Aaron D.
    Ferrigni, Robert G.
    Andrews, Paul E.
    Castle, Erik P.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2009, 104 (11) : 1734 - 1737
  • [45] The Effect of Adverse Patient Characteristics on Perioperative Outcomes in Open and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
    Wenzel, Mike
    Preisser, Felix
    Theissen, Lena H.
    Humke, Clara
    Welte, Maria N.
    Wittler, Clarissa
    Kluth, Luis A.
    Karakiewicz, Pierre I.
    Chun, Felix K. H.
    Mandel, Philipp
    Becker, Andreas
    FRONTIERS IN SURGERY, 2020, 7
  • [46] The diminishing returns of robotic diffusion: complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Sammon, Jesse D.
    Abdollah, Firas
    Klett, Dane E.
    Pucheril, Daniel
    Sood, Akshay
    Quoc-Dien Trinh
    Menon, Mani
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2016, 117 (02) : 211 - 212
  • [47] THE IMPACT OF FRAILTY STATUS ON SURGICAL OUTCOMES AFTER ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY - A PROSPECTIVE ASSESSMENT USING A STANDARDIZED COLLECTION SYSTEM FOR PERIOPERATIVE OUTCOMES
    Rosiello, Giuseppe
    Scuderi, Simone
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    Mazzone, Elio
    Stabile, Armando
    Barletta, Francesco
    Pellegrino, Antony
    Toneatto, Lorenzo
    Cannoletta, Donato
    Quarta, Leonardo
    Colandrea, Gianmarco
    Leni, Riccardo
    Robesti, Daniele
    Capitanio, Umberto
    Larcher, Alessandro
    Salonia, Andrea
    Deho, Federico
    Karakiewicz, Pierre I.
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Briganti, Alberto
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2022, 207 (05): : E1030 - E1030
  • [48] Comparison of perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy among the da Vinci, hinotori, and Hugo robot-assisted surgery systems
    Morizane, Shuichi
    Hussein, Ahmed A.
    Jing, Zhe
    Yamamoto, Atsushi
    Yamane, Hiroshi
    Shimizu, Ryutaro
    Nishikawa, Ryoma
    Kimura, Yusuke
    Yamaguchi, Noriya
    Hikita, Katsuya
    Honda, Masashi
    Guru, Khurshid A.
    Takenaka, Atsushi
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2025, 19 (01)
  • [49] Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs. open radical prostatectomy: latest evidences on perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes
    Dell'Oglio, Paolo
    Mottrie, Alexandre
    Mazzone, Elio
    CURRENT OPINION IN UROLOGY, 2020, 30 (01) : 73 - 78
  • [50] OUTCOMES OF ROBOT-ASSISTED REPAIR OF DIVERSION-RELATED COMPLICATIONS AFTER ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL CYSTECTOMY
    Hussein, Ahmed
    Hashmi, Zishan
    Dibaj, Seyedeh
    Altartir, Tareq
    Fiorica, Thomas
    Wing, Joseph
    Durrani, Mohammad
    Binkowski, John
    Boateng, Lesley
    Wilding, Gregory
    Guru, Khurshid
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2016, 195 (04): : E539 - E539