Background: To report health-related quality of life outcomes as assessed by validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after radical prostatectomy (RP).-Methods: This study analyzed patients treated with RP within The PROState cancer monitoring in Italy, from the National Research Council (Pros-IT CNR). Italian versions of Short-Form Heath Survey and university of California los Angeles-prostate cancer index questionnaires were administered. PROMs were physical composite scores, mental composite scores and urinary, bowel, sexual functions and bothers (UF/B, BF/B, SF/B). Baseline unbalances were controlled with propensity scores and stabilized inverse weights; differences in PROMs between different RP approaches were estimated by mixed models. Results: Of 541 patients treated with RP, 115 (21%) received open RP (ORP), 90 (17%) laparoscopic RP (LRP) and 336 (61%) robot-assisted RP (RARP). At head-to-head-comparisons, RARP showed higher 12-month UF vs. LRP (interaction treatment ∗ time p = 0.03) and 6-month SF vs. ORP (p < 0.001). At 12-month from surgery, 67, 73 and 79% of patients used no pad for urinary loss in ORP, LRP and RARP respectively (no differences for each comparison). Conversely, 16, 27 and 40% of patients declared erections firm enough for sexual intercourse in ORP, LRP and RARP respectively (only significant difference for ORP vs. RARP, p = 0.0004). Conclusions: Different RP approaches lead to significant variations in urinary and sexual PROMs, with a general trend in favour of RARP. However, their clinical significance seems limited.
Impact of Surgical Approach on Patient-Reported Outcomes after Radical Prostatectomy: A Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis from a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study (The Pros-IT CNR Study) / Antonelli, A., Palumbo, C., Noale, M., Porreca, A., Maggi, S., Simeone, C., Bassi, P., Bertoni, F., Bracarda, S., Buglione, M., Conti, G.N., Corvo, R., Gacci, M., Mirone, V., Montironi, R., Triggiani, L., Tubaro, A., Artibani, W., Crepaldi, G., Graziotti, P., et al.. - In: UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS. - ISSN 0042-1138. - 103:1(2019), pp. 8-18. [10.1159/000496980]
Impact of Surgical Approach on Patient-Reported Outcomes after Radical Prostatectomy: A Propensity Score-Weighted Analysis from a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study (The Pros-IT CNR Study)
Tubaro A.;GRAZIOTTI, Piergiorgio;Russi, Elvio Grazioso;Muto G.;Borghesi M.;Borzillo V.;BOVE', Patrizia;CARMIGNANI, Giorgia;Cattarino S.;Catucci F.;CELIA, ALESSANDRA IDA;Collura D.;Corinti M.;CORTI, Lucia;Francolini G.;Gentilucci A.;Italia C.;Lombardo R.;Masciullo S.;Maso G.;Palumbo, Ilaria Maria;PISTONE, ALESSANDRO;PIZZUTI, VALENTINA;Polli C.;Raguso G.;Ruggieri M. P.;SANTACATERINA, ANTONIO;SCARCIA, MARCO;Sciarra A.;SILVANO, GINO;Spagnoletti G.;Tombolini V.;Tronnolone L.;Vitali E.;
2019
Abstract
Background: To report health-related quality of life outcomes as assessed by validated patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) after radical prostatectomy (RP).-Methods: This study analyzed patients treated with RP within The PROState cancer monitoring in Italy, from the National Research Council (Pros-IT CNR). Italian versions of Short-Form Heath Survey and university of California los Angeles-prostate cancer index questionnaires were administered. PROMs were physical composite scores, mental composite scores and urinary, bowel, sexual functions and bothers (UF/B, BF/B, SF/B). Baseline unbalances were controlled with propensity scores and stabilized inverse weights; differences in PROMs between different RP approaches were estimated by mixed models. Results: Of 541 patients treated with RP, 115 (21%) received open RP (ORP), 90 (17%) laparoscopic RP (LRP) and 336 (61%) robot-assisted RP (RARP). At head-to-head-comparisons, RARP showed higher 12-month UF vs. LRP (interaction treatment ∗ time p = 0.03) and 6-month SF vs. ORP (p < 0.001). At 12-month from surgery, 67, 73 and 79% of patients used no pad for urinary loss in ORP, LRP and RARP respectively (no differences for each comparison). Conversely, 16, 27 and 40% of patients declared erections firm enough for sexual intercourse in ORP, LRP and RARP respectively (only significant difference for ORP vs. RARP, p = 0.0004). Conclusions: Different RP approaches lead to significant variations in urinary and sexual PROMs, with a general trend in favour of RARP. However, their clinical significance seems limited.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
