Differences in Patient Characteristics among Men Choosing Open or Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in Contemporary Practice - Analysis of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database.

OBJECTIVE: To examine characteristics of robot-assisted (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We relied on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare-linked database and focused on prostate cancer patients between 2008 and 2009. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, we predicted RARP. RESULTS: Of 5,915 patients, 3,476 (58.8%) underwent RARP and 2,439 (41.2%) ORP. Patients within intermediate (OR 1.4, p = 0.01) or highest (OR 1.5, p = 0.02) education strata and those treated by surgeons with a high volume (OR 2.2, p < 0.001) were more likely to undergo RARP. Conversely, those residing in rural areas (OR 0.7, p = 0.005) and those with clinical stage T2 or higher (OR 0.7, p = 0.006) were less likely to undergo RARP. Additionally, patients from the Southwest were less likely to undergo RARP (OR 0.4, p < 0.001), but those from the Northern Plains were more likely to undergo RARP (OR 1.4, p = 0.02) than their counterparts from the East. Finally, RARP patients were neither younger nor healthier than ORP patients. CONCLUSIONS: Several patient characteristics such as education, region of residence and population density affect the likelihood of RARP vs. ORP treatment. Similarly, clinical stage and surgeon characteristics also affect the assignment to one or other treatment modality.

Suboptimal use of pelvic lymph node dissection: Differences in guideline adherence between robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Our aim was to assess adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and American Urological Association (AUA) guidelines for pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) at the time of either robot-assisted (RARP) or open radical prostatectomy (ORP). METHODS: We relied on the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked database and focused on localized prostate cancer (PCa) patients who were treated with either RARP or ORP between October 2008 and December 2009. Categorical and multivariable logistic regression analyses targeted two endpoints: 1) probability of guideline-recommended PLND; and 2) probability of no PLND, when not guideline-recommended. RESULTS: Among 5268 PCa patients, adherence to NCCN PLND guideline was 56.9% during RARP and 76.5% during ORP (odds ratio [OR] 0.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.3‒0.6). AUA PLND guideline adherence was 68.1% during RARP and 82.4% during ORP (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.5‒0.9). When PLND was not recommended, it was more frequently performed during ORP according to either NCCN (OR 3.7, 95% CI 3.5‒3.9) or AUA (OR 2.7, 95% CI 2.6‒2.8). According to the NCCN guideline, at recommended PLND in ORP patients, 6.3% harboured lymph node invasion (LNI) (number needed to treat [NNT] 16) vs. 3.2% at RARP (NNT 31). According to the AUA guideline, at recommended PLND in ORP patients, 12.3% harboured LNI (NNT 8) vs. 5.1% RARP (NNT 19). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to NCCN and AUA PLND guidelines was lower during RARP than during ORP when PLND was recommended. The rate of non-recommended PLND was also higher during ORP than during RARP. Technical considerations may be at play.