The Impact of Implementation of the European Association of Urology Guidelines Panel Recommendations on Reporting and Grading Complications on Perioperative Outcomes after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

Giorgio Gandaglia, Carlo Andrea Bravi, Paolo Dell'Oglio, Elio Mazzone, Nicola Fossati, Simone Scuderi, Daniele Robesti, Francesco Barletta, Luca Grillo, Steven Maclennan, James N'Dow, Francesco Montorsi, Alberto Briganti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The rate of postoperative complications might vary according to the method used to collect perioperative data. We aimed at assessing the impact of the prospective implementation of the European Association of Urology (EAU) guidelines on reporting and grading of complications in prostate cancer patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). From September 2016, an integrated method for reporting surgical morbidity based on the EAU guidelines was implemented at a single, tertiary center. Perioperative data were prospectively and systematically collected during a patient interview at 30 d after surgery as recommended by the EAU Guidelines Panel Recommendations on Reporting and Grading Complications. The rate and grading of complications of 167 patients who underwent RARP±pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) after the implementation of the prospective collection system (Group 1) were compared with 316 patients treated between January 2015 and August 2016 (Group 2) when a system based on patient chart review was used. No differences were observed in disease characteristics and PLND between the two groups (all p≥0.1). Postoperative complications were graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. Overall, the complication rate was higher when the prospective collection system based on the EAU guidelines was used (29%) than when retrospective chart review (10%; p<0.001) was used. In particular, a substantially higher rate of grade 1 (8.4% vs 4.7%) and 2 (14% vs 2.8%) complications was detected in Group 1 versus Group 2 (p<0.001). Although the rate of complications occurred during hospitalization did not differ (13% vs 10%; p=0.3), 31 (19%) complications after discharge were detected in Group 1. This resulted into a readmission rate of 16%. Conversely, no complications after discharge and readmissions were recorded for Group 2. The implementation of the EAU guidelines on reporting perioperative outcomes roughly doubled the complication rate after RARP and allowed for the detection of complications after discharge in more than 15% of patients that would have been otherwise missed, where patients assessed with the EAU implemented protocol had a threefold higher likelihood of reporting complications.

PATIENT SUMMARY: The implementation of the European Association of Urology guidelines on reporting and grading of complications after urologic procedures in prostate cancer patients roughly doubled the complication rate after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared to retrospective patient chart review. Moreover, it allowed for the detection of complications after discharge in more than 15% of patients that would have been otherwise missed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)4-7
Number of pages4
JournalEuropean Urology
Volume74
Issue number1
Early online date12 Mar 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2018

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Journal Article
  • complications
  • EAU guidelines
  • perioperative outcomes
  • radical prostatectomy
  • readmission

Cite this