219 Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A survery on the influence of postoperative results analysis and surgical video review on postoperative complications and functional results. reviews of random surgeries as a form of quality assurance. Factors of interest in postoperative results analysis and surgical video review related to improvement of postoperative functional outcomes and reduction complications Results of the current study may be compared to the results of an earlier Delphi study performed by our group.1 The results of the current study are in contrast to our earlier study in which ‘management of prostate apex/urethra’ and ‘nerve preservation’ are not mentioned as a factor influencing postoperative urinary continence.1 In both studies agreement was reached on the role perceived quality of the ‘urethro-vesical anastomosis’ concerning postoperative recovery of urinary continence.1 Goldenberg et al. evaluated the influence of surgical skills on functional outcomes using GEARS15, an assessment tool scoring surgical performance with a 5-point Likert scale in six domains (perception, dexterity, efficiency, force sensitivity, autonomy, robotic control). They found significantly higher GEARS scores for the steps ‘bladder neck dissection’ and ‘urethro-vesical anastomosis’ in continent vs... incontinent patients2. Factors indicated to influence complications and outcomes by the surgeons in this study match the results of our earlier Delphi study in a group of Dutch experts.1 This study adds insight into how video review can be used to learn how to influence these factors in order to improve outcome. Earlier research by Birkmeyer et al. has shown it is possible to use surgical videos to predict complications and postoperative outcome.6 A possible influence to the use of postoperative results analysis and surgical video review in daily practice not raised by the RARP surgeons could be the new and more stringent General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union.16 Systems should be put in place to assure safe data storage and privacy protection of the patient. Further investigation into the influence of the new GDRP on the use of postoperative results analysis and surgical video review should be performed. One solution is the anonymization of both surgical video and patient data but this makes correlation of additional follow-up information to the peri-operative data and the surgical video impossible. Limitations The relatively low overall response rate (32%) may reflect the interest in this topic in the urological field. Whereas the responders were generally positive towards data review, the majority of surveyed centers did not respond. If this observation reflects reduced time availability for data review this is reason for concern given the positive effects of structured data review. The results of this study give the first insights into the experienced value of postoperative results analysis and surgical video review in
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw