Utilization and impact of surgical technique on the performance of pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy: Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database

Kathleen F. Mcginley, Xizi Sun, Lauren E. Howard, William J. Aronson, Martha K. Terris, Christopher J. Kane, Christopher L. Amling, Matthew R. Cooperberg, Stephen J. Freedland

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate performance of pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy within an equal access care setting over a period of time, and stratified by prostate cancer risk group and surgical technique. Methods: We identified men in the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database who had open or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy from 2006 to 2013. Univariable logistic regression was used to test the association between age, race, body mass index, total biopsy cores, number of positive biopsy cores, risk group, year, center, surgical volume and surgical technique on pelvic lymph node dissection use. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to examine surgical technique and pelvic lymph node dissection performance. Spearman's correlation examined temporal changes in pelvic lymph node dissection utilization stratified by risk group and surgical technique. Results: A total of 1425 men met inclusion criteria; 67% of them underwent pelvic lymph node dissection. On multivariable analysis, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy was associated with an 92% decreased use of pelvic lymph node dissection in low-risk, 84% decreased in intermediate-risk and 91% decreased in high-risk men (all P < 0.001). In robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, there was a trend for increased pelvic lymph node dissection utilization over time in high-risk men (Spearman; P = 0.077) reaching ~85% in 2012-2013, which was accompanied by increased use in low-risk men (P = 0.016). For open radical prostatectomy, fewer pelvic lymph node dissections were carried out in low-risk men over time, decreasing to ~35% (P = 0.047) in 2012-2013, whereas rates remained high for high-risk men throughout (~95%; P = 0.621). Conclusion: Regardless of risk group, pelvic lymph node dissection is carried out significantly less during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. For robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection utilization increased over time for high-risk men, but rates also increased for low-risk men. Further attention to the discrepancy between provided and guideline recommended pelvic lymph node dissection performance is required to improve prostate cancer care.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)241-246
Number of pages6
JournalInternational Journal of Urology
Volume23
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2016

Fingerprint

Cancer Care Facilities
Prostatectomy
Lymph Node Excision
Databases
Robotics
Prostatic Neoplasms
Biopsy

Keywords

  • Lymph node excision
  • Prostatectomy
  • Prostatic neoplasms
  • Quality of health care
  • Robotic surgical procedures

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology

Cite this

Utilization and impact of surgical technique on the performance of pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy : Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. / Mcginley, Kathleen F.; Sun, Xizi; Howard, Lauren E.; Aronson, William J.; Terris, Martha K.; Kane, Christopher J.; Amling, Christopher L.; Cooperberg, Matthew R.; Freedland, Stephen J.

In: International Journal of Urology, Vol. 23, No. 3, 01.03.2016, p. 241-246.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mcginley, Kathleen F. ; Sun, Xizi ; Howard, Lauren E. ; Aronson, William J. ; Terris, Martha K. ; Kane, Christopher J. ; Amling, Christopher L. ; Cooperberg, Matthew R. ; Freedland, Stephen J. / Utilization and impact of surgical technique on the performance of pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy : Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. In: International Journal of Urology. 2016 ; Vol. 23, No. 3. pp. 241-246.
@article{ee55bc301582417c995274883b1e03f1,
title = "Utilization and impact of surgical technique on the performance of pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy: Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database",
abstract = "Objective: To evaluate performance of pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy within an equal access care setting over a period of time, and stratified by prostate cancer risk group and surgical technique. Methods: We identified men in the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database who had open or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy from 2006 to 2013. Univariable logistic regression was used to test the association between age, race, body mass index, total biopsy cores, number of positive biopsy cores, risk group, year, center, surgical volume and surgical technique on pelvic lymph node dissection use. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to examine surgical technique and pelvic lymph node dissection performance. Spearman's correlation examined temporal changes in pelvic lymph node dissection utilization stratified by risk group and surgical technique. Results: A total of 1425 men met inclusion criteria; 67{\%} of them underwent pelvic lymph node dissection. On multivariable analysis, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy was associated with an 92{\%} decreased use of pelvic lymph node dissection in low-risk, 84{\%} decreased in intermediate-risk and 91{\%} decreased in high-risk men (all P < 0.001). In robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, there was a trend for increased pelvic lymph node dissection utilization over time in high-risk men (Spearman; P = 0.077) reaching ~85{\%} in 2012-2013, which was accompanied by increased use in low-risk men (P = 0.016). For open radical prostatectomy, fewer pelvic lymph node dissections were carried out in low-risk men over time, decreasing to ~35{\%} (P = 0.047) in 2012-2013, whereas rates remained high for high-risk men throughout (~95{\%}; P = 0.621). Conclusion: Regardless of risk group, pelvic lymph node dissection is carried out significantly less during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. For robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection utilization increased over time for high-risk men, but rates also increased for low-risk men. Further attention to the discrepancy between provided and guideline recommended pelvic lymph node dissection performance is required to improve prostate cancer care.",
keywords = "Lymph node excision, Prostatectomy, Prostatic neoplasms, Quality of health care, Robotic surgical procedures",
author = "Mcginley, {Kathleen F.} and Xizi Sun and Howard, {Lauren E.} and Aronson, {William J.} and Terris, {Martha K.} and Kane, {Christopher J.} and Amling, {Christopher L.} and Cooperberg, {Matthew R.} and Freedland, {Stephen J.}",
year = "2016",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/iju.13027",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "23",
pages = "241--246",
journal = "International Journal of Urology",
issn = "0919-8172",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Utilization and impact of surgical technique on the performance of pelvic lymph node dissection at radical prostatectomy

T2 - Results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database

AU - Mcginley, Kathleen F.

AU - Sun, Xizi

AU - Howard, Lauren E.

AU - Aronson, William J.

AU - Terris, Martha K.

AU - Kane, Christopher J.

AU - Amling, Christopher L.

AU - Cooperberg, Matthew R.

AU - Freedland, Stephen J.

PY - 2016/3/1

Y1 - 2016/3/1

N2 - Objective: To evaluate performance of pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy within an equal access care setting over a period of time, and stratified by prostate cancer risk group and surgical technique. Methods: We identified men in the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database who had open or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy from 2006 to 2013. Univariable logistic regression was used to test the association between age, race, body mass index, total biopsy cores, number of positive biopsy cores, risk group, year, center, surgical volume and surgical technique on pelvic lymph node dissection use. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to examine surgical technique and pelvic lymph node dissection performance. Spearman's correlation examined temporal changes in pelvic lymph node dissection utilization stratified by risk group and surgical technique. Results: A total of 1425 men met inclusion criteria; 67% of them underwent pelvic lymph node dissection. On multivariable analysis, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy was associated with an 92% decreased use of pelvic lymph node dissection in low-risk, 84% decreased in intermediate-risk and 91% decreased in high-risk men (all P < 0.001). In robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, there was a trend for increased pelvic lymph node dissection utilization over time in high-risk men (Spearman; P = 0.077) reaching ~85% in 2012-2013, which was accompanied by increased use in low-risk men (P = 0.016). For open radical prostatectomy, fewer pelvic lymph node dissections were carried out in low-risk men over time, decreasing to ~35% (P = 0.047) in 2012-2013, whereas rates remained high for high-risk men throughout (~95%; P = 0.621). Conclusion: Regardless of risk group, pelvic lymph node dissection is carried out significantly less during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. For robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection utilization increased over time for high-risk men, but rates also increased for low-risk men. Further attention to the discrepancy between provided and guideline recommended pelvic lymph node dissection performance is required to improve prostate cancer care.

AB - Objective: To evaluate performance of pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy within an equal access care setting over a period of time, and stratified by prostate cancer risk group and surgical technique. Methods: We identified men in the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database who had open or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy from 2006 to 2013. Univariable logistic regression was used to test the association between age, race, body mass index, total biopsy cores, number of positive biopsy cores, risk group, year, center, surgical volume and surgical technique on pelvic lymph node dissection use. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to examine surgical technique and pelvic lymph node dissection performance. Spearman's correlation examined temporal changes in pelvic lymph node dissection utilization stratified by risk group and surgical technique. Results: A total of 1425 men met inclusion criteria; 67% of them underwent pelvic lymph node dissection. On multivariable analysis, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy was associated with an 92% decreased use of pelvic lymph node dissection in low-risk, 84% decreased in intermediate-risk and 91% decreased in high-risk men (all P < 0.001). In robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, there was a trend for increased pelvic lymph node dissection utilization over time in high-risk men (Spearman; P = 0.077) reaching ~85% in 2012-2013, which was accompanied by increased use in low-risk men (P = 0.016). For open radical prostatectomy, fewer pelvic lymph node dissections were carried out in low-risk men over time, decreasing to ~35% (P = 0.047) in 2012-2013, whereas rates remained high for high-risk men throughout (~95%; P = 0.621). Conclusion: Regardless of risk group, pelvic lymph node dissection is carried out significantly less during robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. For robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection utilization increased over time for high-risk men, but rates also increased for low-risk men. Further attention to the discrepancy between provided and guideline recommended pelvic lymph node dissection performance is required to improve prostate cancer care.

KW - Lymph node excision

KW - Prostatectomy

KW - Prostatic neoplasms

KW - Quality of health care

KW - Robotic surgical procedures

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84959519358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84959519358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/iju.13027

DO - 10.1111/iju.13027

M3 - Article

C2 - 26667212

AN - SCOPUS:84959519358

VL - 23

SP - 241

EP - 246

JO - International Journal of Urology

JF - International Journal of Urology

SN - 0919-8172

IS - 3

ER -