ABSTRACT
INTRODUÇÃO: O câncer de próstata é responsável por 15% dos casos novos de câncer que acometem os homens e pela 5ª causa de morte. As técnicas minimamente invasivas, sobretudo a cirurgia robótica tornou-se a técnica comumente empregada nos Estados Unidos. Muitos artigos tentam demonstrar a curva de aprendizado necessária para a estabilização dos resultados, mas a implementação de novas tecnologias passa por diversos desafios, além da avaliação de seus resultados e dos custos, o que em países em desenvolvimento pode ter um importante impacto no sistema de saúde. OBJETIVO: Avaliar a curva de aprendizado da prostatectomia radical laparoscópica robótica assistida (PRRA) para o tratamento do câncer de próstata, de acordo com a continência urinária, a potência sexual, o tempo cirúrgico e o controle oncológico. MÉTODOS: Duzentos pacientes com neoplasia de próstata localizada submetidos à PRRA por um único cirurgião foram divididos em quatro grupos de acordo com a sequência das cirurgias. Foram avaliados os dados intra-operatórios, como: tempo cirúrgico, perda sanguínea estimada e as margens cirúrgicas. Também durante o pósoperatório foram avaliadas a potência (IIEF) e a continência (ICIQ). RESULTADOS: Os pacientes apresentaram idade média de 60,6 anos (59,72-61,61), volume prostático ao toque retal de 40 gramas e valor do PSA 6,95 ng/ml (5,79-8,10) semelhantes em todos os grupos (p > 0,05). A biópsia prostática pré-operatória mostrou diferença no escore de Gleason e no tamanho da próstata, sendo que o escore 6 foi menos frequente no grupo 4, representado por 23 pacientes (46%) e no grupo 1, com 39 pacientes (78%) (p < 0,01). Já o tamanho prostático avaliado pelo USTR foi de 39,6 gramas (29,75-48,7) no grupo 4 e 30,5 gramas (23,0-38,15) no grupo 2. A curva de aprendizado estabelecida demonstrou uma diminuição no tempo cirúrgico de 157 minutos (145-170) no grupo 1, para 132 minutos (119-140) no grupo 2 (p < 0,01). A perda sanguínea estimada também se reduziu...
BACKGROUND: Prostate cancer is responsible for 15% of new cases of male cancer and is the fifth leading cause of death. Minimally invasive and mainly, robotic surgery technique became the technique most widely utilized in the United States. Many articles have tried to demonstrate the required learning curve to achieve the plateau. Although, new techniques implementation go through many challenges besides the evaluation of its results, costs also became an issue, which may impact in developing countries health system. OBJECTIVE: We aim to evaluate the learning curve of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for the treatment of prostate cancer, according to continence, potency, surgical time and oncologic control. METHODS: Two hundred patients with localized prostate cancer that underwent RARP by a single surgeon were divided into four groups according to its surgical sequence. Intraoperative data, such as surgical time, estimated blood loss and margins were recorded. Also postoperative functional parameters as continence and potency were gathered using validated questionnaires (ICIQ and IIEF). RESULTS: Patients mean age were 60.6 years (59.72- 61.61), mean prostate volume at digital rectal examination was 40 grams and PSA value 6.95 ng/ml (5.79-8.10) were similar in all groups (p > 0.05). Pre-operative prostate biopsy showed difference in Gleason score and prostate size. Gleason score 6 was less frequent in group 4, 23 patients (46%), than group 1, 39 patients (78%)(p <0.01) and prostate size at TRUS was 39.6 grams (29.75- 48.7) in group 4 and 30.5 grams (23.0- 38.15) in group 2. The established learning curve showed a reduction on surgical time from 157 minutes (145-170) in group 1 to 132 minutes (119-140 min) in group 2 (p < 0.01). The estimated blood loss also decreased almost to half, from 395 ml (250-500) in group 1 to 200 ml (150-250) in group 3 (p < 0.01). Positive margins decreased from 16% to only 8 %, but were statistically similar (p=0.236)....
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Learning Curve , Laparoscopy/methods , Prostate , Prostatic Neoplasms , Prostatectomy/methods , Robotics/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Becoming proficient in laparoscopic surgery is dependent on the acquisition of specialized skills that can only be obtained from specific training. This training could be achieved in various ways using inanimate models, animal models, or live patient surgery--each with its own pros and cons. Currently, there are substantial data that support the benefits of animal model training in the initial learning of laparoscopy. Nevertheless, whether these benefits extent themselves to moderately experienced surgeons is uncertain. The purpose of this study was to determine if training using a porcine model results in a quantifiable gain in laparoscopic skills for moderately experienced laparoscopic surgeons. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six urologists with some laparoscopic experience were asked to perform a radical nephrectomy weekly for 10 weeks in a porcine model. The procedures were recorded, and surgical performance was assessed by two experienced laparoscopic surgeons using a previously published surgical performance assessment tool. The obtained data were then submitted to statistical analysis. RESULTS: With training, blood loss was reduced approximately 45% when comparing the averages of the first and last surgical procedures (P=0.006). Depth perception showed an improvement close to 35% (P=0.041), and dexterity showed an improvement close to 25% (P=0.011). Total operative time showed trends of improvement, although it was not significant (P=0.158). Autonomy, efficiency, and tissue handling were the only aspects that did not show any noteworthy change (P=0.202, P=0.677, and P=0.456, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that there are quantifiable gains in laparoscopic skills obtained from training in an animal model. Our results suggest that these benefits also extend to more advanced stages of the learning curve, but it is unclear how far along the learning curve training with animal models provides a clear benefit for the performance of laparoscopic procedures. Future studies are necessary to confirm these findings and better understand the impact of this learning tool on surgical practice.
