A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22 393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients

Prasanna Sooriakumaran, Abhishek Srivastava, Shahrokh F. Shariat, Phillip D. Stricker, Thomas Ahlering, Christopher G. Eden, Peter N. Wiklund, Rafael Sanchez-Salas, Alexandre Mottrie, David Lee, David E. Neal, Reza Ghavamian, Peter Nyirady, Andreas Nilsson, Stefan Carlsson, Evanguelos Xylinas, Wolfgang Loidl, Christian Seitz, Paul Schramek, Claus RoehrbornXavier Cathelineau, Douglas Skarecky, Greg Shaw, Anne Warren, Warick J. Delprado, Anne Marie Haynes, Ewout Steyerberg, Monique J. Roobol, Ashutosh K. Tewari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

85 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Positive surgical margins (PSMs) are a known risk factor for biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and are potentially affected by surgical technique and volume. Objective To investigate whether radical prostatectomy (RP) modality and volume affect PSM rates. Design, setting, and participants Fourteen institutions in Europe, the United States, and Australia were invited to participate in this study, all of which retrospectively provided margins data on 9778 open RP, 4918 laparoscopic RP, and 7697 robotic RP patients operated on between January 2000 and October 2011. Outcome measurements and statistical analyses The outcome measure was PSM rate. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and propensity score methods identified odds ratios for risk of a PSM for one modality compared with another, after adjustment for age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, postoperative Gleason score, pathologic stage, and year of surgery. Classic adjustment using standard covariates was also implemented to compare PSM rates based on center volume for each minimally invasive surgical cohort. Results and limitations Open RP patients had higher-risk PCa at time of surgery on average and were operated on earlier in the study time period on average, compared with minimally invasive cohorts. Crude margin rates were lowest for robotic RP (13.8%), intermediate for laparoscopic RP (16.3%), and highest for open RP (22.8%); significant differences persisted, although were ameliorated, after statistical adjustments. Lower-volume centers had increased risks of PSM compared with the highest-volume center for both laparoscopic RP and robotic RP. The study is limited by its nonrandomized nature; missing data across covariates, especially year of surgery in many of the open cohort cases; lack of standardized histologic processing and central pathology review; and lack of information regarding potential confounders such as patient comorbidity, nerve-sparing status, lymph node status, tumor volume, and individual surgeon caseload. Conclusions This multinational, multi-institutional study of 22 393 patients after RP suggests that PSM rates might be lower after minimally invasive techniques than after open RP and that PSM rates are affected by center volume in laparoscopic and robotic cases. Patient summary In this study, we compared the effectiveness of different types of surgery for prostate cancer by looking at the rates of cancer cells left at the margins of what was removed in the operations. We compared open, keyhole, and robotic surgery from many centers across the globe and found that robotic and keyhole operations appeared to have lower margin rates than open surgeries. How many cases a center and surgeon do seems to affect this rate for both robotic and keyhole procedures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)450-456
Number of pages7
JournalEuropean Urology
Volume66
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Prostatectomy
Robotics
Prostatic Neoplasms
Margins of Excision
Propensity Score
Neoplasm Grading
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Tumor Burden
Comorbidity
Logistic Models
Lymph Nodes
Odds Ratio
Regression Analysis
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Pathology
Recurrence

Keywords

  • Laparoscopic
  • Margins
  • Open
  • Radical prostatectomy
  • Robotic

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Urology
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22 393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients. / Sooriakumaran, Prasanna; Srivastava, Abhishek; Shariat, Shahrokh F.; Stricker, Phillip D.; Ahlering, Thomas; Eden, Christopher G.; Wiklund, Peter N.; Sanchez-Salas, Rafael; Mottrie, Alexandre; Lee, David; Neal, David E.; Ghavamian, Reza; Nyirady, Peter; Nilsson, Andreas; Carlsson, Stefan; Xylinas, Evanguelos; Loidl, Wolfgang; Seitz, Christian; Schramek, Paul; Roehrborn, Claus; Cathelineau, Xavier; Skarecky, Douglas; Shaw, Greg; Warren, Anne; Delprado, Warick J.; Haynes, Anne Marie; Steyerberg, Ewout; Roobol, Monique J.; Tewari, Ashutosh K.

In: European Urology, Vol. 66, No. 3, 2014, p. 450-456.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sooriakumaran, P, Srivastava, A, Shariat, SF, Stricker, PD, Ahlering, T, Eden, CG, Wiklund, PN, Sanchez-Salas, R, Mottrie, A, Lee, D, Neal, DE, Ghavamian, R, Nyirady, P, Nilsson, A, Carlsson, S, Xylinas, E, Loidl, W, Seitz, C, Schramek, P, Roehrborn, C, Cathelineau, X, Skarecky, D, Shaw, G, Warren, A, Delprado, WJ, Haynes, AM, Steyerberg, E, Roobol, MJ & Tewari, AK 2014, 'A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22 393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients', European Urology, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 450-456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.018
Sooriakumaran, Prasanna ; Srivastava, Abhishek ; Shariat, Shahrokh F. ; Stricker, Phillip D. ; Ahlering, Thomas ; Eden, Christopher G. ; Wiklund, Peter N. ; Sanchez-Salas, Rafael ; Mottrie, Alexandre ; Lee, David ; Neal, David E. ; Ghavamian, Reza ; Nyirady, Peter ; Nilsson, Andreas ; Carlsson, Stefan ; Xylinas, Evanguelos ; Loidl, Wolfgang ; Seitz, Christian ; Schramek, Paul ; Roehrborn, Claus ; Cathelineau, Xavier ; Skarecky, Douglas ; Shaw, Greg ; Warren, Anne ; Delprado, Warick J. ; Haynes, Anne Marie ; Steyerberg, Ewout ; Roobol, Monique J. ; Tewari, Ashutosh K. / A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22 393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients. In: European Urology. 2014 ; Vol. 66, No. 3. pp. 450-456.
@article{4c9179372cdf4eda9f1c5388557dc55f,
title = "A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22 393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients",
abstract = "Background Positive surgical margins (PSMs) are a known risk factor for biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and are potentially affected by surgical technique and volume. Objective To investigate whether radical prostatectomy (RP) modality and volume affect PSM rates. Design, setting, and participants Fourteen institutions in Europe, the United States, and Australia were invited to participate in this study, all of which retrospectively provided margins data on 9778 open RP, 4918 laparoscopic RP, and 7697 robotic RP patients operated on between January 2000 and October 2011. Outcome measurements and statistical analyses The outcome measure was PSM rate. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and propensity score methods identified odds ratios for risk of a PSM for one modality compared with another, after adjustment for age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, postoperative Gleason score, pathologic stage, and year of surgery. Classic adjustment using standard covariates was also implemented to compare PSM rates based on center volume for each minimally invasive surgical cohort. Results and limitations Open RP patients had higher-risk PCa at time of surgery on average and were operated on earlier in the study time period on average, compared with minimally invasive cohorts. Crude margin rates were lowest for robotic RP (13.8{\%}), intermediate for laparoscopic RP (16.3{\%}), and highest for open RP (22.8{\%}); significant differences persisted, although were ameliorated, after statistical adjustments. Lower-volume centers had increased risks of PSM compared with the highest-volume center for both laparoscopic RP and robotic RP. The study is limited by its nonrandomized nature; missing data across covariates, especially year of surgery in many of the open cohort cases; lack of standardized histologic processing and central pathology review; and lack of information regarding potential confounders such as patient comorbidity, nerve-sparing status, lymph node status, tumor volume, and individual surgeon caseload. Conclusions This multinational, multi-institutional study of 22 393 patients after RP suggests that PSM rates might be lower after minimally invasive techniques than after open RP and that PSM rates are affected by center volume in laparoscopic and robotic cases. Patient summary In this study, we compared the effectiveness of different types of surgery for prostate cancer by looking at the rates of cancer cells left at the margins of what was removed in the operations. We compared open, keyhole, and robotic surgery from many centers across the globe and found that robotic and keyhole operations appeared to have lower margin rates than open surgeries. How many cases a center and surgeon do seems to affect this rate for both robotic and keyhole procedures.",
keywords = "Laparoscopic, Margins, Open, Radical prostatectomy, Robotic",
author = "Prasanna Sooriakumaran and Abhishek Srivastava and Shariat, {Shahrokh F.} and Stricker, {Phillip D.} and Thomas Ahlering and Eden, {Christopher G.} and Wiklund, {Peter N.} and Rafael Sanchez-Salas and Alexandre Mottrie and David Lee and Neal, {David E.} and Reza Ghavamian and Peter Nyirady and Andreas Nilsson and Stefan Carlsson and Evanguelos Xylinas and Wolfgang Loidl and Christian Seitz and Paul Schramek and Claus Roehrborn and Xavier Cathelineau and Douglas Skarecky and Greg Shaw and Anne Warren and Delprado, {Warick J.} and Haynes, {Anne Marie} and Ewout Steyerberg and Roobol, {Monique J.} and Tewari, {Ashutosh K.}",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.018",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "66",
pages = "450--456",
journal = "European Urology",
issn = "0302-2838",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A multinational, multi-institutional study comparing positive surgical margin rates among 22 393 open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy patients

AU - Sooriakumaran, Prasanna

AU - Srivastava, Abhishek

AU - Shariat, Shahrokh F.

AU - Stricker, Phillip D.

AU - Ahlering, Thomas

AU - Eden, Christopher G.

AU - Wiklund, Peter N.

AU - Sanchez-Salas, Rafael

AU - Mottrie, Alexandre

AU - Lee, David

AU - Neal, David E.

AU - Ghavamian, Reza

AU - Nyirady, Peter

AU - Nilsson, Andreas

AU - Carlsson, Stefan

AU - Xylinas, Evanguelos

AU - Loidl, Wolfgang

AU - Seitz, Christian

AU - Schramek, Paul

AU - Roehrborn, Claus

AU - Cathelineau, Xavier

AU - Skarecky, Douglas

AU - Shaw, Greg

AU - Warren, Anne

AU - Delprado, Warick J.

AU - Haynes, Anne Marie

AU - Steyerberg, Ewout

AU - Roobol, Monique J.

AU - Tewari, Ashutosh K.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Background Positive surgical margins (PSMs) are a known risk factor for biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and are potentially affected by surgical technique and volume. Objective To investigate whether radical prostatectomy (RP) modality and volume affect PSM rates. Design, setting, and participants Fourteen institutions in Europe, the United States, and Australia were invited to participate in this study, all of which retrospectively provided margins data on 9778 open RP, 4918 laparoscopic RP, and 7697 robotic RP patients operated on between January 2000 and October 2011. Outcome measurements and statistical analyses The outcome measure was PSM rate. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and propensity score methods identified odds ratios for risk of a PSM for one modality compared with another, after adjustment for age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, postoperative Gleason score, pathologic stage, and year of surgery. Classic adjustment using standard covariates was also implemented to compare PSM rates based on center volume for each minimally invasive surgical cohort. Results and limitations Open RP patients had higher-risk PCa at time of surgery on average and were operated on earlier in the study time period on average, compared with minimally invasive cohorts. Crude margin rates were lowest for robotic RP (13.8%), intermediate for laparoscopic RP (16.3%), and highest for open RP (22.8%); significant differences persisted, although were ameliorated, after statistical adjustments. Lower-volume centers had increased risks of PSM compared with the highest-volume center for both laparoscopic RP and robotic RP. The study is limited by its nonrandomized nature; missing data across covariates, especially year of surgery in many of the open cohort cases; lack of standardized histologic processing and central pathology review; and lack of information regarding potential confounders such as patient comorbidity, nerve-sparing status, lymph node status, tumor volume, and individual surgeon caseload. Conclusions This multinational, multi-institutional study of 22 393 patients after RP suggests that PSM rates might be lower after minimally invasive techniques than after open RP and that PSM rates are affected by center volume in laparoscopic and robotic cases. Patient summary In this study, we compared the effectiveness of different types of surgery for prostate cancer by looking at the rates of cancer cells left at the margins of what was removed in the operations. We compared open, keyhole, and robotic surgery from many centers across the globe and found that robotic and keyhole operations appeared to have lower margin rates than open surgeries. How many cases a center and surgeon do seems to affect this rate for both robotic and keyhole procedures.

AB - Background Positive surgical margins (PSMs) are a known risk factor for biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and are potentially affected by surgical technique and volume. Objective To investigate whether radical prostatectomy (RP) modality and volume affect PSM rates. Design, setting, and participants Fourteen institutions in Europe, the United States, and Australia were invited to participate in this study, all of which retrospectively provided margins data on 9778 open RP, 4918 laparoscopic RP, and 7697 robotic RP patients operated on between January 2000 and October 2011. Outcome measurements and statistical analyses The outcome measure was PSM rate. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and propensity score methods identified odds ratios for risk of a PSM for one modality compared with another, after adjustment for age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, postoperative Gleason score, pathologic stage, and year of surgery. Classic adjustment using standard covariates was also implemented to compare PSM rates based on center volume for each minimally invasive surgical cohort. Results and limitations Open RP patients had higher-risk PCa at time of surgery on average and were operated on earlier in the study time period on average, compared with minimally invasive cohorts. Crude margin rates were lowest for robotic RP (13.8%), intermediate for laparoscopic RP (16.3%), and highest for open RP (22.8%); significant differences persisted, although were ameliorated, after statistical adjustments. Lower-volume centers had increased risks of PSM compared with the highest-volume center for both laparoscopic RP and robotic RP. The study is limited by its nonrandomized nature; missing data across covariates, especially year of surgery in many of the open cohort cases; lack of standardized histologic processing and central pathology review; and lack of information regarding potential confounders such as patient comorbidity, nerve-sparing status, lymph node status, tumor volume, and individual surgeon caseload. Conclusions This multinational, multi-institutional study of 22 393 patients after RP suggests that PSM rates might be lower after minimally invasive techniques than after open RP and that PSM rates are affected by center volume in laparoscopic and robotic cases. Patient summary In this study, we compared the effectiveness of different types of surgery for prostate cancer by looking at the rates of cancer cells left at the margins of what was removed in the operations. We compared open, keyhole, and robotic surgery from many centers across the globe and found that robotic and keyhole operations appeared to have lower margin rates than open surgeries. How many cases a center and surgeon do seems to affect this rate for both robotic and keyhole procedures.

KW - Laparoscopic

KW - Margins

KW - Open

KW - Radical prostatectomy

KW - Robotic

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84905922472&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84905922472&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.018

DO - 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.11.018

M3 - Article

C2 - 24290695

AN - SCOPUS:84905922472

VL - 66

SP - 450

EP - 456

JO - European Urology

JF - European Urology

SN - 0302-2838

IS - 3

ER -