Suboptimal use of pelvic lymph node dissection: Differences in guideline adherence between robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy
Open Access
- 16 August 2016
- journal article
- Published by Canadian Urological Association Journal in Canadian Urological Association Journal
- Vol. 10 (7-8) , 269-76
Abstract
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.Keywords
This publication has 26 references indexed in Scilit:
- Adherence of the indication to European Association of Urology guideline recommended pelvic lymph node dissection at a high-volume center: Differences between open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomyEuropean Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2015
- Extended pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: impact of surgical volume on efficacy and complications in a single-surgeon series.Canadian Urological Association Journal, 2015
- The impact of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy on the use and extent of pelvic lymph node dissection in the “post-dissemination” periodEuropean Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2014
- Impact of the introduction of a robotic training programme on prostate cancer stage migration at a single tertiary referral centreBJU International, 2012
- Lymph node dissection in radical prostatectomy: What nodes?Canadian Urological Association Journal, 2011
- The deep vein thrombosis caused by lymphocele after endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection.Canadian Urological Association Journal, 2011
- The Role of Pelvic Lymphadenectomy for Prostate Cancer—Therapeutic?Journal of Urology, 2008
- Guideline for the Management of Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: 2007 UpdateJournal of Urology, 2007
- The Association Between Total and Positive Lymph Node Counts, and Disease Progression in Clinically Localized Prostate CancerJournal of Urology, 2006
- Disease Progression and Survival of Patients With Positive Lymph Nodes After Radical Prostatectomy. Is there a Chance of Cure?Journal of Urology, 2003