Premium
The evidence‐based pathway for peri‐operative management of open and robotically assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy
Author(s) -
Kaufman Melissa R.,
Baumgartner Roxelyn G.,
Anderson Laura W.,
Smith Joseph A.,
Chang Sam S.,
Herrell S. Duke,
Cookson Michael S.
Publication year - 2007
Publication title -
bju international
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.773
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1464-410X
pISSN - 1464-4096
DOI - 10.1111/j.1464-410x.2007.06777.x
Subject(s) - medicine , prostatectomy , medline , intensive care medicine , regimen , evidence based medicine , evidence based practice , general surgery , surgery , prostate cancer , alternative medicine , cancer , pathology , political science , law
Associate Editor Ash Tewari Editorial Board Ralph Clayman, USA Inderbir Gill, USA Roger Kirby, UK Mani Menon, USA OBJECTIVE To assess reports supporting the novel and comprehensive evidence‐based pathway for radical prostatectomy (RP), as collaborative‐care pathways have helped to optimize management of patients treated with RP and such clinical pathways provide an ideal framework for constructing an original evidence‐based pathway for the complete peri‐operative care of these patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS We searched for articles on Medline via PubMed to identify reports describing consensus opinions on appropriate aspects of the peri‐operative management of patients treated with RP, specifically seeking to discern information on preoperative antibiotic regimen, peri‐operative laboratory testing, use of β‐blockers for those at cardiac risk, pulmonary treatment, deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis, diet advancement, pain management, anti‐emetic use, bowel regimen, and catheter removal after RP. RESULTS Available reports were used to substantiate each variable of our collaborative‐care pathway for RP. When available, meta‐analyses were used to provide a broad review of the recognized clinical research. Otherwise, many controlled studies and retrospective reviews were relied upon to provide evidence to construct a framework for clinical decision‐making. CONCLUSIONS This is the first pathway for the peri‐operative management of major urological procedure that is well integrated into current literature. The critical aspects of clinical decision‐making in the patient treated with RP were validated by the available research.