The evidence-based pathway for peri-operative management of open and robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess reports supporting the novel and comprehensive evidence-based pathway for radical prostatectomy (RP), as collaborative-care pathways have helped to optimize management of patients treated with RP and such clinical pathways provide an ideal framework for constructing an original evidence-based pathway for the complete peri-operative care of these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We searched for articles on Medline via PubMed to identify reports describing consensus opinions on appropriate aspects of the peri-operative management of patients treated with RP, specifically seeking to discern information on preoperative antibiotic regimen, peri-operative laboratory testing, use of beta-blockers for those at cardiac risk, pulmonary treatment, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, diet advancement, pain management, anti-emetic use, bowel regimen, and catheter removal after RP. RESULTS: Available reports were used to substantiate each variable of our collaborative-care pathway for RP. When available, meta-analyses were used to provide a broad review of the recognized clinical research. Otherwise, many controlled studies and retrospective reviews were relied upon to provide evidence to construct a framework for clinical decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first pathway for the peri-operative management of major urological procedure that is well integrated into current literature. The critical aspects of clinical decision-making in the patient treated with RP were validated by the available research.

Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective assessment of postoperative pain.

PURPOSE: Laparoscopic prostatectomy, whether or not coupled with robotic assistance, is often considered less invasive than open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP). Minimal postoperative pain has been reported following robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) but there have been few comparative studies with RRP. We compared perioperative narcotic use and patient reported pain in a prospective patient series. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between June 2003 and May 2004, 314 patients underwent radical prostatectomy at our institution, including RALP in 159, RRP in 154 and conversion in 1. All patients were treated on a postoperative clinical pathway that included 30 mg ketorolac intravenously immediately postoperatively, followed by 15 mg intravenously every 6 hours. No regional anesthesia (epidural/spinal) narcotics or patient controlled analgesic pumps were used. All narcotic use was converted to morphine sulfate equivalents for purpose of analysis. A Likert scale of 0 to 10 was used to assess pain on the day of surgery, and on postoperative days 1 and 14. RESULTS: The total mean morphine sulfate equivalent +/- SD in patients in the RALP and RRP groups was low and, when corrected for length of stay, it was not statistically different (22.41 +/- 1.13 vs 23.01 +/- 1.16 mg, p = 0.72). Mean Likert pain perception scores were low at all time points in the RALP and RRP groups but statistically lower on the day of surgery in the RALP cohort (2.05 +/- 1.99 vs 2.60 +/- 2.25, p = 0.027). Patient reported mean pain scores were almost identical for RALP vs RRP on postoperative days 1 (1.76 +/- 1.87 vs 1.73 +/- 1.77, p = 0.880) and 14 (2.51 +/- 1.91 vs 2.42 +/- 1.84, p = 0.722). CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative narcotic use and patient reported pain are low regardless of the surgical approach used for radical prostatectomy. RALP did not provide a clinically meaningful decrease in pain compared with RRP, primarily because of the low pain scores reported in each group. Outcomes other than pain will ultimately determine the role of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and RALP.