Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Studies Reporting Oncologic Outcome After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy Review

Industry Collaboration International Collaboration

cited authors

  • Novara, Giacomo, Ficarra, Vincenzo, Mocellin, Simone, Ahlering, Thomas E., Carroll, Peter R., Graefen, Markus, Guazzoni, Giorgio, Menon, Mani, Patel, Vipul R., Shariat, Shahrokh F., Tewari, Ashutosh K., Van Poppel, Hendrik, Zattoni, Filiberto, Montorsi, Francesco, Mottrie, Alexandre, Rosen, Raymond C., Wilson, Timothy G.

funding text

  • Giacomo Novara certifies that all conflicts of interest, including specific financial interests and relationships and affiliations relevant to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript (eg, employment/affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, or patents filed, received, or pending), are the following: Giacomo Novara was lecturer/advisory board member for Astellas, Eli Lilly, Pierre Fabre, Provenge, Recordati Int., Takeda. Vincenzo Ficarra was speaker for Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA. Giorgio Guazzoni, Francesco Montorsi, and Alexandre Mottrie acknowledge receiving research grants from Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA.

abstract

  • Context: Despite the large diffusion of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), literature and data on the oncologic outcome of RARP are limited. Objective: Evaluate lymph node yield, positive surgical margins (PSMs), use of adjuvant therapy, and biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival following RARP and perform a cumulative analysis of all studies comparing the oncologic outcomes of RARP and retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Evidence acquisition: A systematic review of the literature was performed in August 2011, searching Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. A free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy was applied. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publications dating from January 1, 2008. A cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v. 4.2 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) and Stata 11.0 SE software (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Evidence synthesis: We retrieved 79 papers evaluating oncologic outcomes following RARP. The mean PSM rate was 15% in all comers and 9% in pathologically localized cancers, with some tumor characteristics being the most relevant predictors of PSMs. Several surgeon-related characteristics or procedure-related issues may play a major role in PSM rates. With regard to BCR, the very few papers with a follow-up duration >5 yr demonstrated 7-yr BCR-free survival estimates of approximately 80%. Finally, all the cumulative analyses comparing RARP with RRP and comparing RARP with LRP demonstrated similar overall PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: odds ratio [OR]: 1.21; p = 0.19; RARP vs LRP: OR: 1.12; p = 0.47), pT2 PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: OR: 1.25; p = 0.31; RARP vs LRP: OR: 0.99; p = 0.97), and BCR-free survival estimates (RARP vs RRP: hazard ratio [ HR]: 0.9; p = 0.526; RARP vs LRP: HR: 0.5; p = 0.141), regardless of the surgical approach. Conclusions: PSM rates are similar following RARP, RRP, and LRP. The few data available on BCR from high-volume centers are promising, but definitive comparisons with RRP or LRP are not currently possible. Finally, significant data on cancer-specific mortality are not currently available. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of European Association of Urology.

authors

Publication Date

  • September 1, 2012

webpage

published in

category

start page

  • 382

end page

  • 404

volume

  • 62

issue

  • 3

WoS Citations

  • 226
  • 230

WoS References

  • 104