Doctoral Program in Medical Pathophysiology, Faculty of Medical Sciences, State University of Campinas-UNICAMP, Campinas, Brazil.
UroScience and Department of Urology, State University of Campinas-UNICAMP, Campinas, Brazil.
J Endourol. 2023 May;37(5):521-530. doi: 10.1089/end.2022.0819. Epub 2023 Apr 5.
Systematic reviews (SR) have always been used as the best evidence to compare three radical prostatectomy (RP) techniques: retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP). Despite the superiority of minimally invasive surgery in relation to perioperative outcomes, the literature still cannot establish which technique is superior in relation to oncological outcomes. A new methodology called Reverse Systematic Review (RSR) was created to gather the best evidence in the literature based on a heterogeneous sample, allowing the comparison of oncological outcomes from a population point of view. To apply the RSR to compare RP techniques in relation to oncological outcomes: positive surgical margin (PSM) and biochemical recurrence rate (BCR). A search was carried out in eight databases between 2000 and 2020 through SR studies referring RRP, LRP, or RARP (80 SR). All references used in these SR were captured referring to 1724 reports. Preoperative and oncological outcomes were compared and correlated among RRP, LRP, and RARP. Five hundred fifty-nine (32.4%) reports for RRP, 413 (23.9%) for LRP, and 752 (43.7%) for RARP, and a total of 1,353,485 patients were found. Regarding PSM, 284 reports were collected for RRP, 324 for LRP, and 499 for RARP, with rates of 23.6%, 20.7%, and 19.2%, respectively, and only the RRP with statistical difference ( < 0.001). Using a nonlinear regression model, the BCR was correlated with follow-up time at 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, and 10 years: 10%, 15%, 18%, 20%, 23%, and 38% for RRP; 6%, 9%, 13%, 20%, 23%, and 10% for LRP; and 8%, 12%, 16%, 23%, 27%, and 19% for RARP. The absence of long-term work for RARP prevented more accurate projections of BCR. RSR proved to be effective in generating a population and heterogeneous sample capable of demonstrating better oncological results for minimally invasive surgery (LRP and RARP) compared to RRP. It demonstrated the maturity of temporal follow-up data for RRP and LRP and the impact of absence of late follow-up from RARP studies on the long-term rate of BCR. After 20 years of coexistence of the three main radical prostatectomy techniques, the RSR was able to detect better results from minimally invasive surgery in relation to PSMs and long-term BCRs.
系统评价(SR)一直被用作比较三种根治性前列腺切除术(RP)技术的最佳证据:经耻骨后根治性前列腺切除术(RRP)、腹腔镜根治性前列腺切除术(LRP)和机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RARP)。尽管微创手术在围手术期结果方面具有优势,但文献仍然无法确定哪种技术在肿瘤学结果方面更具优势。为了收集文献中基于异质样本的最佳证据,创建了一种称为反向系统评价(RSR)的新方法,允许从人群的角度比较肿瘤学结果。 为了应用 RSR 比较 RP 技术在肿瘤学结果方面的差异:阳性手术切缘(PSM)和生化复发率(BCR)。 在 2000 年至 2020 年期间,通过参考 RRP、LRP 或 RARP 的 SR 研究,在八个数据库中进行了搜索(80 个 SR)。这些 SR 中使用的所有参考文献都通过参考 1724 份报告进行了捕获。比较了 RRP、LRP 和 RARP 之间的术前和肿瘤学结果,并进行了相关性分析。 在 RRP 中发现了 559 份(32.4%)报告,LRP 中发现了 413 份(23.9%)报告,RARP 中发现了 752 份(43.7%)报告,总共发现了 1353485 名患者。关于 PSM,RRP 收集了 284 份报告,LRP 收集了 324 份报告,RARP 收集了 499 份报告,PSM 率分别为 23.6%、20.7%和 19.2%,只有 RRP 具有统计学差异( < 0.001)。使用非线性回归模型,将 BCR 与 1、2、3、5、7 和 10 年的随访时间相关联:RRP 为 10%、15%、18%、20%、23%和 38%;LRP 为 6%、9%、13%、20%、23%和 10%;RARP 为 8%、12%、16%、23%、27%和 19%。由于缺乏对 RARP 的长期研究,无法更准确地预测 BCR。 RSR 被证明在生成人群和异质样本方面非常有效,能够证明微创手术(LRP 和 RARP)在肿瘤学方面的结果优于 RRP。它证明了 RRP 和 LRP 的随访时间数据已经成熟,以及 RARP 研究缺乏晚期随访对长期 BCR 率的影响。 在三种主要的根治性前列腺切除术技术共存 20 年后,RSR 能够检测到微创手术在 PSM 和长期 BCR 方面的更好结果。