Comparison of laparoscopic and minilaparotomy pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer staging in a community practice

To compare the cost-effectiveness and morbidity of minilaparotomy (MINILAP) and laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAP) in a community practice setting. We reviewed our experience with 44 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who had staging pelvic lymphadenectomy from January 1992 through Apr...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:	Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.) N.J.), 1997, Vol.49 (1), p.60-64
Hauptverfasser:	Lezin, Mark St, Cherrie, Roderic, Cattolica, Eugene V.
Format:	Artikel
Sprache:	eng
Schlagworte:	Aged Cost-Benefit Analysis Humans Laparoscopy Laparotomy Lymph Node Excision - economics Lymph Node Excision - methods Lymphatic Metastasis Male Neoplasm Staging Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery
Online-Zugang:	Volltext
Tags:	Tag hinzufügen Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!

container_end_page	64
container_issue	1
container_start_page	60
container_title	Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)
container_volume	49
creator	Lezin, Mark St Cherrie, Roderic Cattolica, Eugene V.
description	To compare the cost-effectiveness and morbidity of minilaparotomy (MINILAP) and laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAP) in a community practice setting. We reviewed our experience with 44 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who had staging pelvic lymphadenectomy from January 1992 through April 1995 in a general health maintenance organization urology practice. Of this group, 22 men had LAP and 22 men had MINILAP. MINILAP and LAP groups were similar in age (mean 67 years), Gleason score (mean 7.2 and 6.8), prostate-specific antigen level (mean 46 and 49 ng/mL), and clinical stage (T1 to T3). Operative time was statistically significantly shorter for MINILAP (mean 1.2 hours) than for LAP (mean 2.9 hours). Complication rate was 9.1% for MINILAP and 31.8% for LAP. Lymph node metastasis was found in 45% of MINILAP patients and in 27% of LAP patients. Mean initial hospital stay was 1.0 day for MINILAP and 1.6 days for LAP. Total hospital stay including hospital readmission for complications was 1.5 days for MINILAP and 2.6 days for LAP. Cost of MINILAP was at least $1900 less than that of LAP because of shorter total hospital stay, shorter operation time, and lower equipment cost. Compared with LAP, MINILAP was more cost-effective and produced less morbidity. Patient satisfaction with the procedures was similar. MINILAP is an excellent alternative to LAP for prostate cancer staging in general urology practice.
doi_str_mv	10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00378-0
format	Article
fullrecord	<record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78773771</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0090429596003780</els_id><sourcerecordid>78773771</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-12b469234a6cf270c4876b65098651adde6cd56158eca224a7eeb606258c314c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQhi0EKtvCT6jkE4JDYJzEdnxCaAUUqRIH4Gx5J5NiFNvBzlbdf4-7u-qVkz3zvvP1MHYt4L0AoT78ADDQ9K2Rb416B9DpoYFnbCNkqxtjjHzONk-Wl-yylD8AoJTSF-zC1K8Y9IY9bFNYXPYlRZ4mPrsapIJp8chdHHnw0Z-SawoHvtB8X5X5EJbfbqRIeExPKfOl1q1uJY4uImVegzsf77iP3HFMIeyjX2uH7HD1SK_Yi8nNhV6f3yv268vnn9ub5vb712_bT7cNdgrWRrS7Xpm2653CqdWA_aDVTkkwg5LCjSMpHKUSciB0bds7TbRToFo5YCd67K7Ym1Pfut_fPZXVBl-Q5tlFSvti9aB1p7WoRnkyYj2kZJrskn1w-WAF2Efi9kjcPuK0RtkjcQu17vo8YL8LND5VnRFX_eNJp3rlvadsC3qqiEafKz47Jv-fCf8A5HGS2A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>78773771</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of laparoscopic and minilaparotomy pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer staging in a community practice</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Lezin, Mark St ; Cherrie, Roderic ; Cattolica, Eugene V.</creator><creatorcontrib>Lezin, Mark St ; Cherrie, Roderic ; Cattolica, Eugene V.</creatorcontrib><description>To compare the cost-effectiveness and morbidity of minilaparotomy (MINILAP) and laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAP) in a community practice setting. We reviewed our experience with 44 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who had staging pelvic lymphadenectomy from January 1992 through April 1995 in a general health maintenance organization urology practice. Of this group, 22 men had LAP and 22 men had MINILAP. MINILAP and LAP groups were similar in age (mean 67 years), Gleason score (mean 7.2 and 6.8), prostate-specific antigen level (mean 46 and 49 ng/mL), and clinical stage (T1 to T3). Operative time was statistically significantly shorter for MINILAP (mean 1.2 hours) than for LAP (mean 2.9 hours). Complication rate was 9.1% for MINILAP and 31.8% for LAP. Lymph node metastasis was found in 45% of MINILAP patients and in 27% of LAP patients. Mean initial hospital stay was 1.0 day for MINILAP and 1.6 days for LAP. Total hospital stay including hospital readmission for complications was 1.5 days for MINILAP and 2.6 days for LAP. Cost of MINILAP was at least $1900 less than that of LAP because of shorter total hospital stay, shorter operation time, and lower equipment cost. Compared with LAP, MINILAP was more cost-effective and produced less morbidity. Patient satisfaction with the procedures was similar. MINILAP is an excellent alternative to LAP for prostate cancer staging in general urology practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-4295</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1527-9995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00378-0</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9000187</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Laparotomy ; Lymph Node Excision - economics ; Lymph Node Excision - methods ; Lymphatic Metastasis ; Male ; Neoplasm Staging ; Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology ; Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery</subject><ispartof>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 1997, Vol.49 (1), p.60-64</ispartof><rights>1997 Elsevier Science Inc. All Rights Reserved</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-12b469234a6cf270c4876b65098651adde6cd56158eca224a7eeb606258c314c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-12b469234a6cf270c4876b65098651adde6cd56158eca224a7eeb606258c314c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00378-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,4010,27904,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9000187$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lezin, Mark St</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cherrie, Roderic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cattolica, Eugene V.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of laparoscopic and minilaparotomy pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer staging in a community practice</title><title>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</title><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><description>To compare the cost-effectiveness and morbidity of minilaparotomy (MINILAP) and laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAP) in a community practice setting. We reviewed our experience with 44 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who had staging pelvic lymphadenectomy from January 1992 through April 1995 in a general health maintenance organization urology practice. Of this group, 22 men had LAP and 22 men had MINILAP. MINILAP and LAP groups were similar in age (mean 67 years), Gleason score (mean 7.2 and 6.8), prostate-specific antigen level (mean 46 and 49 ng/mL), and clinical stage (T1 to T3). Operative time was statistically significantly shorter for MINILAP (mean 1.2 hours) than for LAP (mean 2.9 hours). Complication rate was 9.1% for MINILAP and 31.8% for LAP. Lymph node metastasis was found in 45% of MINILAP patients and in 27% of LAP patients. Mean initial hospital stay was 1.0 day for MINILAP and 1.6 days for LAP. Total hospital stay including hospital readmission for complications was 1.5 days for MINILAP and 2.6 days for LAP. Cost of MINILAP was at least $1900 less than that of LAP because of shorter total hospital stay, shorter operation time, and lower equipment cost. Compared with LAP, MINILAP was more cost-effective and produced less morbidity. Patient satisfaction with the procedures was similar. MINILAP is an excellent alternative to LAP for prostate cancer staging in general urology practice.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopy</subject><subject>Laparotomy</subject><subject>Lymph Node Excision - economics</subject><subject>Lymph Node Excision - methods</subject><subject>Lymphatic Metastasis</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Neoplasm Staging</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology</subject><subject>Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery</subject><issn>0090-4295</issn><issn>1527-9995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQhi0EKtvCT6jkE4JDYJzEdnxCaAUUqRIH4Gx5J5NiFNvBzlbdf4-7u-qVkz3zvvP1MHYt4L0AoT78ADDQ9K2Rb416B9DpoYFnbCNkqxtjjHzONk-Wl-yylD8AoJTSF-zC1K8Y9IY9bFNYXPYlRZ4mPrsapIJp8chdHHnw0Z-SawoHvtB8X5X5EJbfbqRIeExPKfOl1q1uJY4uImVegzsf77iP3HFMIeyjX2uH7HD1SK_Yi8nNhV6f3yv268vnn9ub5vb712_bT7cNdgrWRrS7Xpm2653CqdWA_aDVTkkwg5LCjSMpHKUSciB0bds7TbRToFo5YCd67K7Ym1Pfut_fPZXVBl-Q5tlFSvti9aB1p7WoRnkyYj2kZJrskn1w-WAF2Efi9kjcPuK0RtkjcQu17vo8YL8LND5VnRFX_eNJp3rlvadsC3qqiEafKz47Jv-fCf8A5HGS2A</recordid><startdate>1997</startdate><enddate>1997</enddate><creator>Lezin, Mark St</creator><creator>Cherrie, Roderic</creator><creator>Cattolica, Eugene V.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1997</creationdate><title>Comparison of laparoscopic and minilaparotomy pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer staging in a community practice</title><author>Lezin, Mark St ; Cherrie, Roderic ; Cattolica, Eugene V.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c360t-12b469234a6cf270c4876b65098651adde6cd56158eca224a7eeb606258c314c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopy</topic><topic>Laparotomy</topic><topic>Lymph Node Excision - economics</topic><topic>Lymph Node Excision - methods</topic><topic>Lymphatic Metastasis</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Neoplasm Staging</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology</topic><topic>Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lezin, Mark St</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cherrie, Roderic</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cattolica, Eugene V.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lezin, Mark St</au><au>Cherrie, Roderic</au><au>Cattolica, Eugene V.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of laparoscopic and minilaparotomy pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer staging in a community practice</atitle><jtitle>Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.)</jtitle><addtitle>Urology</addtitle><date>1997</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>60</spage><epage>64</epage><pages>60-64</pages><issn>0090-4295</issn><eissn>1527-9995</eissn><abstract>To compare the cost-effectiveness and morbidity of minilaparotomy (MINILAP) and laparoscopic pelvic lymphadenectomy (LAP) in a community practice setting. We reviewed our experience with 44 consecutive patients with prostate cancer who had staging pelvic lymphadenectomy from January 1992 through April 1995 in a general health maintenance organization urology practice. Of this group, 22 men had LAP and 22 men had MINILAP. MINILAP and LAP groups were similar in age (mean 67 years), Gleason score (mean 7.2 and 6.8), prostate-specific antigen level (mean 46 and 49 ng/mL), and clinical stage (T1 to T3). Operative time was statistically significantly shorter for MINILAP (mean 1.2 hours) than for LAP (mean 2.9 hours). Complication rate was 9.1% for MINILAP and 31.8% for LAP. Lymph node metastasis was found in 45% of MINILAP patients and in 27% of LAP patients. Mean initial hospital stay was 1.0 day for MINILAP and 1.6 days for LAP. Total hospital stay including hospital readmission for complications was 1.5 days for MINILAP and 2.6 days for LAP. Cost of MINILAP was at least $1900 less than that of LAP because of shorter total hospital stay, shorter operation time, and lower equipment cost. Compared with LAP, MINILAP was more cost-effective and produced less morbidity. Patient satisfaction with the procedures was similar. MINILAP is an excellent alternative to LAP for prostate cancer staging in general urology practice.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>9000187</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00378-0</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext	fulltext
identifier	ISSN: 0090-4295
ispartof	Urology (Ridgewood, N.J.), 1997, Vol.49 (1), p.60-64
issn	0090-4295 1527-9995
language	eng
recordid	cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78773771
source	MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects	Aged Cost-Benefit Analysis Humans Laparoscopy Laparotomy Lymph Node Excision - economics Lymph Node Excision - methods Lymphatic Metastasis Male Neoplasm Staging Prostatic Neoplasms - pathology Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery
title	Comparison of laparoscopic and minilaparotomy pelvic lymphadenectomy for prostate cancer staging in a community practice
url	https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T20%3A57%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20laparoscopic%20and%20minilaparotomy%20pelvic%20lymphadenectomy%20for%20prostate%20cancer%20staging%20in%20a%20community%20practice&rft.jtitle=Urology%20(Ridgewood,%20N.J.)&rft.au=Lezin,%20Mark%20St&rft.date=1997&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=60&rft.epage=64&rft.pages=60-64&rft.issn=0090-4295&rft.eissn=1527-9995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0090-4295(96)00378-0&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E78773771%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=78773771&rft_id=info:pmid/9000187&rft_els_id=S0090429596003780&rfr_iscdi=true