XML Feed for RxPG News   Add RxPG News Headlines to My Yahoo!   Javascript Syndication for RxPG News

Research Health World General
 
  Home
 
 Latest Research
 Cancer
  Breast
  Skin
  Blood
  Prostate
  Liver
  Colon
  Thyroid
  Endometrial
  Brain
  Therapy
  Risk Factors
  Esophageal
  Bladder
  Lung
  Rectal Cancer
  Pancreatic Cancer
  Bone Cancer
  Cervical Cancer
  Testicular Cancer
  Gastric Cancer
  Ovarian Cancer
  Nerve Tissue
  Renal Cell Carcinoma
 Psychiatry
 Genetics
 Surgery
 Aging
 Ophthalmology
 Gynaecology
 Neurosciences
 Pharmacology
 Cardiology
 Obstetrics
 Infectious Diseases
 Respiratory Medicine
 Pathology
 Endocrinology
 Immunology
 Nephrology
 Gastroenterology
 Biotechnology
 Radiology
 Dermatology
 Microbiology
 Haematology
 Dental
 ENT
 Environment
 Embryology
 Orthopedics
 Metabolism
 Anaethesia
 Paediatrics
 Public Health
 Urology
 Musculoskeletal
 Clinical Trials
 Physiology
 Biochemistry
 Cytology
 Traumatology
 Rheumatology
 
 Medical News
 Health
 Opinion
 Healthcare
 Professionals
 Launch
 Awards & Prizes
 
 Careers
 Medical
 Nursing
 Dental
 
 Special Topics
 Euthanasia
 Ethics
 Evolution
 Odd Medical News
 Feature
 
 World News
 Tsunami
 Epidemics
 Climate
 Business
Search

Last Updated: Aug 19th, 2006 - 22:18:38

Prostate Channel
subscribe to Prostate newsletter

Latest Research : Cancer : Prostate

   DISCUSS   |   EMAIL   |   PRINT
Expensive robot-assisted prostate surgery has possible benefits
Aug 29, 2005, 22:31, Reviewed by: Dr.

"Hospitals have to consider whether they can use the system for more than one type of procedure to make it worth the capital equipment investment, if the institute can use it for many applications"

 
Although minimally invasive prostate removal aided by a robot can lead to less blood loss, shorter hospital stays and fewer complications, there is no evidence that the procedure improves cure rates, according to a new technology assessment.

In addition, robotic surgery, in high demand among patients, can lose money for hospitals because of its expense and special training required, according to the new review of studies by ECRI.

ECRI is a nonprofit health services research agency that produces systematic evidence reviews on medical devices, drugs, biotechnologies, procedures and behavioral health services.

The review of 625 cases looks at two studies that compared the three procedures available to patients: traditional open surgery, laparoscopic (also known as minimally invasive) surgery and robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery.

In the review, average blood loss was significantly lower for patients who underwent either of the two minimally invasive procedures: less than 150 ml for robotic-assisted and 382 ml for non-robotic, while the average blood loss for open radical surgery in the two studies was 418 ml and 910 ml.

Cancer cure rate, measured by presence of cancerous cells at the surface of the removed prostate, and by PSA levels following surgery, was nearly identical for all three procedures.

Hospital stay was significantly shorter with robotic-assisted prostatectomy compared to open surgery in both studies, 25.9 hours versus 52.8 hours in one study.

One study reported significant difference in catheterization time: 7 days for robotic-assisted patients, 7.9 days for non-robotic laparoscopy patients and 15.8 days for open surgery patients.

Open prostatectomy had a significantly higher overall complication rate of 15 percent, while non-robotic laparoscopic prostatectomy had a rate of 10 percent and robotic-assisted had a complication rate of 5 percent.

Prostate cancer patients' biggest concerns -- after cure -- are the possible side effects of surgery, including urinary incontinence and sexual impotency. Data on these side effects from robotically assisted prostatectomy were sketchy at best, and no evidence was available to indicate that any surgical method emerged as better than another for these side effects.

So far, patient demand, not evidence, is the driving force behind the rise in robotic-assisted prostatectomy, according to report co-author Diane Robertson, director of Health Technology Assessment Services for ECRI.

Robertson says that the concept of minimally invasive surgery is highly attractive to patients, with many willing to travel for the robotic procedure, but she cautions that patients should choose based on surgeon experience and evidence on efficacy rather than just picking the latest technology.

"If you have to choose between someone who hasn't performed many robotic surgeries and a person who has performed many open procedures -- take the open procedure," says Peter G. Schulam, M.D., Ph.D., a urology professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA.

Schulam routinely performs non-robotic laparoscopy, the more technically difficult of the minimally invasive surgeries.

Michael Esposito, M.D., a surgeon in Hackensack, N.J., who has performed about 425 robot-assisted surgeries, explains, "Robotics is a modification tool that further refines laparoscopy." Esposito says that robotics offers a three-dimensional view with much greater clarity, made possible with a binocular telescope held by one of the robotic arms.

Robotics allows surgeons to work seated at a console a few feet away from the operating table, pushing a joystick and pressing foot controls to remotely manipulate the three robotic arms at the bedside.

One arm positions a high-resolution camera, while the other two arms control the surgical instruments. "Robotic [hands] are wristed instrument that can open, close, flex and rotate 170 degrees," Esposito says. "They're so small and meticulous that you can scale movements and do extremely fine work."

Robotics is meant to eliminate hand tremors, but some surgeons find the lack of contact with instruments disconcerting. Esposito says that, once experienced with robotics, "your vision becomes a surrogate for tactile feedback."

Schulam says that both forms of minimally invasive surgery lead to shorter recovery and less pain "because there's no stretching of muscle, and possibly, less blood loss." Also, "patients prefer the five smaller holes over a larger midline incision."

Cost was the one area in which the older open surgery was the clear winner: Open radical prostatectomy costs $487 less a case than non-robotic laparoscopy and $1,726 less than robot-assisted prostatectomy.

According to the review, "Shorter operative time and decreased hospital stays associated with the robotic procedure did not make up for the cost of the additional equipment expenditure." Estimated costs of the robotic system to a provider run about $1.2 million a year, with maintenance costs of $120,000 a year and one-time costs of $1,500 a case.

"Hospitals have to consider whether they can use the system for more than one type of procedure to make it worth the capital equipment investment, if the institute can use it for many applications," says Robertson. She adds that many operating rooms are not big enough to accommodate the robotic system.
 

- New review of studies by ECRI
 

ECRI Website

 
Subscribe to Prostate Newsletter
E-mail Address:

 

ECRI is a nonprofit international health services research agency that provides information and technical assistance to the health care community.

Related Prostate News

Gene therapy study takes aim at prostate cancer
Pain associated with prostatic biopsy is related to the site biopsied
Admixture mapping reveals locus for prostate cancer risk
Diet modification and stress reduction may attenuate progression of prostate cancer
Prostatic Irradiation Doesn’t Lead To Any Appreciable Increase in Rectal Cancer Risk
Pomegranate Juice Slows PSA Acceleration Rate
Pomegranate juice could kill cancer cells
Early estrogen exposure leads to later prostate cancer risk
JHDM2A enzyme induced H3K9 demethylation offers new look at male hormone regulation
What is the appropriate age to stop prostate cancer screening?


For any corrections of factual information, to contact the editors or to send any medical news or health news press releases, use feedback form

Top of Page

 

© Copyright 2004 onwards by RxPG Medical Solutions Private Limited
Contact Us