Learning curve for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a large prospective multicentre study

References

• Vickers A, Bianco F, Cronin A, et al. The learning curve for surgical margins after open radical prostatectomy: implications for margin status as an oncological end point. J Urol. 2010;183(4):1360–1365.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steineck G, Bjartell A, Hugosson J, et al. Degree of preservation of the neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy and urinary continence 1 year after surgery. Eur Urol. 2015;67(3):559–568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlsson S, Berglund A, Sjoberg D, et al. Effects of surgeon variability on oncologic and functional outcomes in a population-based setting. BMC Urol. 2014;14(1):25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallerstedt A, Nyberg T, Carlsson S, et al. Quality of life after open radical prostatectomy compared with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol Focus. 2019;5(3):389–398.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nyberg M, Sjoberg DD, Carlsson SV, et al. Surgeon heterogeneity significantly affects functional and oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy in the Swedish LAPPRO trial. BJU Int. 2021;127(3):361–368.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickers AJ, Bianco FJ, Serio AM, et al. The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;199(15):1171–1177.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Klein EA, Bianco FJ, Serio AM, et al. Surgeon experience is strongly associated with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy for all preoperative risk categories. J Urol. 2008;179(6):2212–2216.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickers AJ, Bianco FJ, Gonen M, et al. Effects of pathologic stage on the learning curve for radical prostatectomy: evidence that recurrence in organ-confined cancer is largely related to inadequate surgical technique. Eur Urol. 2008;53(5):960–966.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bianco FJ, Jr., Vickers AJ, Cronin AM, et al. Variations among experienced surgeons in cancer control after open radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2010;183(3):977–982.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickers AJ, Cronin AM. Data and programming code from the studies on the learning curve for radical prostatectomy. BMC Res Notes. 2010;3:234.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Thorsteinsdottir T, Stranne J, Carlsson S, et al. LAPPRO: a prospective multicentre comparative study of robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer. Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2011;45(2):102–112.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haglind E, Carlsson S, Stranne J, et al. Urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction after robotic versus open radical prostatectomy: a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial. Eur Urol. 2015;68(2):216–225.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantz A, Bock D, Akre O, et al. Functional and oncological outcomes after open versus robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localised prostate cancer: 8-year follow-up. Eur Urol. 2021;80(5):650–660.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyberg M, Hugosson J, Wiklund P, LAPPRO group, et al. Functional and oncologic outcomes between open and robotic radical prostatectomy at 24-month follow-up in the Swedish LAPPRO trial. Eur Urol Oncol. 2018;1(5):353–360.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nyberg M, Akre O, Bock D, et al. Risk of recurrent disease 6 years after open or robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in the prospective controlled trial LAPPRO. Eur Urol Open Sci. 2020;20:54–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Axen E, Godtman RA, Bjartell A, et al. Degree of preservation of neurovascular bundles in radical prostatectomy and recurrence of prostate cancer. Eur Urol Open Sci. 2021;30:25–33.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Little RJA. Missing-data adjustments in large surveys. J Business Econ Statist. 1988;6(3):287–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marshall A, Altman DG, Holder RL, et al. Combining estimates of interest in prognostic modelling studies after multiple imputation: current practice and guidelines. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9:57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates D, Mächler M, Bolker B, et al. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Soft. 2015;67(1):1–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling survival data: extending the Cox model. New York: Springer; 2000.
   Google Scholar
• van Buuren S, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K. mice: multivariate imputation by chained equations in R. J Stat Soft. 2011;45(3):1–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lüdecke D. ggeffects: tidy data frames of marginal effects from regression models. JOSS. 2018;3(26):772.
   Google Scholar
• Bravi CA, Tin A, Vertosick E, et al. The impact of experience on the risk of surgical margins and biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a learning curve study. J Urol. 2019;202(1):108–113.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M, et al. Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol. 2014;65(3):521–531.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Berg I, Buettner S, van den Braak R, et al. Low socioeconomic status is associated with worse outcomes after curative surgery for colorectal cancer: results from a large, multicenter study. J Gastrointest Surg. 2020;24(11):2628–2636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moller H, Sandin F, Robinson D, et al. Colorectal cancer survival in socioeconomic groups in England: variation is mainly in the short term after diagnosis. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(1):46–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mansson A, Henningsohn L, Steineck G, et al. Neutral third party versus treating institution for evaluating quality of life after radical cystectomy. Eur Urol. 2004;46(2):195–199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litwin MS, Lubeck DP, Henning JM, et al. Differences in urologist and patient assessments of health related quality of life in men with prostate cancer: results of the CaPSURE database. J Urol. 1998;159(6):1988–1992.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar