Skip to main content

Table 1 Descriptive statistics of the study population

From: Comparison of the effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies based on complication rates: a retrospective observational study with administrative data from Switzerland

Variables

Complete study

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical Prostatectomy

Conventional laparoscopic radical Prostatectomy

Open retropubic radical prostatectomy

P-value

Number of cases (share of total sample)

8’593 (100%)

3’032 (35.3%)

3’181 (37.0%)

2’380 (27.7%)

-

Cases with supplementary insurance (share per surgical procedure)

3’448 (40.1%)

1’206 (39.8%)

1’525 (47.9%)

717 (30.1%)

< 0.001

Cases with Swiss citizenship (proportion per surgical procedure)

7’569 (88.1%)

2’631 (86.8%)

2’780 (87.4%)

2’158 (90.7%)

< 0.001

Average age (standard deviation per surgical procedure)

65.6 (6.8)

65.0 (6.7)

65.4 (6.8)

66.6 (6.8)

< 0.001

Average length of stay (standard deviation per surgical procedure)

6.7 (3.6)

6.0 (3.9)

6.2 (3.0)

8.2 (3.3)

< 0.001

Average Elixhauser Comorbidity Measure (standard deviation per surgical procedure)

0.90 (5.8)

1.35 (5.99)

0.23 (5.10)

1.22 (6.4)

< 0.001

Reentry due to complication (proportion per surgical procedure)

35 (0.4%)

10 (0.3%)

15 (0.5%)

10 (0.4%)

0.676

Cases died during hospitalisation (proportion per surgical procedure)

2 (0.02%)

1 (0.07%)

0

1 (0.08%)

0.681

Cases with regional lymphadenectomy as a secondary treatment

5’329 (62.0%)

1’899 (62.6%)

1’969 (61.9%)

1’461 (61.4%)

0.614

Number of cases with at least one of the 25 most frequent procedure-related complications (proportion per surgical procedure)

998 (11.6%)

306 (10.1%)

285 (9.0%)

407 (17.1%)

< 0.001

Cases with other complication (share per surgical procedure)

280 (3.3%)

94 (3.1%)

95 (3.0%)

91 (3.8%)

0.183

  1. Note: The p-values for continuous variables were calculated using ANOVA, and for categorical variables using the Chi-square test