Robotic versus laparoscopic urological surgery: incidence of reoperation and complications

Nessn H. Azawi*, Malene Rohrsted, Johan Poulsen, Lars Lund, Bjarne Kromann-Andersen, Lars Henning Olsen

*Kontaktforfatter for dette arbejde

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Abstrakt

Objective: To report the introduction of minimum invasive surgery in Denmark with focus on the reoperation and complication rates. Materials and methods: Data were prospectively collected at the national UroLap database. The database was established in 2003 in Denmark to register all laparoscopic urological procedures as well as their peri- and post-operative outcomes. In the period from 2009–2014, 10,843 patients were registered with the database, of which 10,546 (97%) had a complete Clavien-Dindo score within the first 30 postoperative days. Results: The mean age of patients was 60.5 years (S.D. = 16.2), and 415 patients (4%) were under the age of 17 years. The male-to-female ratio was 4:1. At the end of 2010, 25% of surgeries used the robotic technique, but the frequency of robotic surgeries increased to 56% in 2014. No complications were reported in 74.6% of the urological procedures. The mortality rate was reported at only 0.27% of all patients. Patients who underwent a urological procedure performed by consultant urologists had a lower rate of complication compared to procedures performed by trainees (p = 0.03) but not staff doctors (p = 0.9). There were no significant differences in complication rates between staff doctors and trainee (p = 0.2). Conclusion: Robotic and laparoscopic urological procedures are associated with low serious complication rates. Postoperative complications were more common among surgeries performed by trainees. The robotic approach is associated with a shorter L.O.S. compared to the laparoscopic approach and linked to lower reoperation rates.

OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftScandinavian Journal of Urology
Vol/bind53
Udgave nummer1
Sider (fra-til)56-61
ISSN2168-1805
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 18. mar. 2019

    Fingerprint

Citationsformater