Despite limited data on outcome, the use of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP) has surged as a result of aggressive marketing of the potential benefits over conventional open surgery even at greater costs.
A study published in JAMA reported mixed results. It was a population-based observational cohort study that identified nearly 2000 men who had MIRP and nearly 7000 had traditional surgery.
The researchers found that use of MIRP increased from 9% in 2003 to 43% in 2006-7. White and Asian living in high income areas are more likely to opt for MIRP. They also found that MIRP was associated with shorter hospital stay and fewer blood transfusion or other postoperative complications. However MIRP was associated with incontinence and erectile dysfunction in the long term.
The authors concluded that their findings reflected "a society and health care system enamored with new technology that increased direct and indirect health care costs but had yet to uniformly realize marketed or potential benefits during early adoption."
Source: "Comparative Effectiveness of Minimally Invasive vs Open Radical Prostatectomy". JAMA 2009;302(14):1557-1564. (f/t via Athens)
No comments:
Post a Comment