Background/objectives: Robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy (RARP and ORP) are established procedures for localized prostate cancer, with comparable oncological and functional outcomes. Little is known about patients' knowledge of both procedures. This study aimed to examine comparatively the informational behaviour and knowledge of patients undergoing ORP vs. RARP.
Methods: This prospective, multicentre study included patients who underwent RARP or ORP prior to presurgery counselling. The questionnaires gathered information about patients' information-seeking behaviours and their assessment of outcomes for RARP vs. ORP. We investigated risk factors for the misperception of procedure outcomes.
Results: A total of 508 patients were included (307 RARP (60%); 201 ORP (40%)). The most common sources of information were outpatient urologists (84%), urologic departments (67%) and the internet (57%). Compared with ORP, RARP patients more often received the same amount of information about both procedures (60% vs. 40%, < 0.001). Compared with ORP, RARP patients wrongfully considered their procedure to be superior in terms of oncological and functional outcomes. In the multivariable analysis, age > 66 years (OR 2.1, = 0.02), no high school degree (OR 1.9, = 0.04), unbalanced information search (OR 2.4, = 0.02), RARP patient status (OR 8.9, < 0.001), and treatment at a centre offering only one procedure (OR 3.5, < 0.001) were independent predictors of misperception.
Conclusions: RARP patients wrongfully considered their intervention to be oncologically and functionally more beneficial than ORP patients perceived it to be. This may be due to unbalanced sources of information. Urologists and surgical centres must address this misperception to enable patients to make informed decisions.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers17020300 | DOI Listing |
Medicina (Kaunas)
January 2025
Department of Urology, Severance Hospital, Urological Science Institute, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul 06273, Republic of Korea.
: We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to evaluate and compare the perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) with open radical prostatectomy (ORP) in patients with prostate cancer. A comprehensive literature search was performed in Pubmed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library for papers published before May 2021. Only studies of patients with prostate cancer that assessed perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes and reported outcome values were included.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCancers (Basel)
January 2025
Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, 01307 Dresden, Germany.
Background/objectives: Robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy (RARP and ORP) are established procedures for localized prostate cancer, with comparable oncological and functional outcomes. Little is known about patients' knowledge of both procedures. This study aimed to examine comparatively the informational behaviour and knowledge of patients undergoing ORP vs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt J Urol
January 2025
Department of Urology, Steve Biko Academic Hospital, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.
Background: Studies comparing oncological outcomes between robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP) are often limited by bias because of their multi-institutional and multiple surgeon design. Studies from a single institution and single surgeon are uncommon.
Objective: To compare oncological outcomes between RARP and ORP at a single institution by a single surgeon.
World J Mens Health
December 2024
Department of Urology, Soonchunhyang University Seoul Hospital, Soonchunhyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Purpose: Although surgical procedures including robotic surgery in radical prostatectomy have evolved, urinary incontinence after surgery are still not resolved. This study was to evaluate the risk of clinically significant incontinence after radical prostatectomy according to various procedural types.
Materials And Methods: The retrospective cohort study included prostate cancer (n=14,484) in South Korea between 2002 and 2017 as shown in the National Health Insurance Data.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!