Peter Wiklund
Karolinska Institutet
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Peter Wiklund.
European Urology | 2016
Jonathan I. Epstein; Michael J. Zelefsky; Daniel D. Sjoberg; Joel B. Nelson; Lars Egevad; Cristina Magi-Galluzzi; Andrew J. Vickers; Anil V. Parwani; Victor E. Reuter; Samson W. Fine; James A. Eastham; Peter Wiklund; Misop Han; C.A. Reddy; Jay P. Ciezki; Tommy Nyberg; Eric A. Klein
BACKGROUND Despite revisions in 2005 and 2014, the Gleason prostate cancer (PCa) grading system still has major deficiencies. Combining of Gleason scores into a three-tiered grouping (6, 7, 8-10) is used most frequently for prognostic and therapeutic purposes. The lowest score, assigned 6, may be misunderstood as a cancer in the middle of the grading scale, and 3+4=7 and 4+3=7 are often considered the same prognostic group. OBJECTIVE To verify that a new grading system accurately produces a smaller number of grades with the most significant prognostic differences, using multi-institutional and multimodal therapy data. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Between 2005 and 2014, 20,845 consecutive men were treated by radical prostatectomy at five academic institutions; 5501 men were treated with radiotherapy at two academic institutions. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Outcome was based on biochemical recurrence (BCR). The log-rank test assessed univariable differences in BCR by Gleason score. Separate univariable and multivariable Cox proportional hazards used four possible categorizations of Gleason scores. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS In the surgery cohort, we found large differences in recurrence rates between both Gleason 3+4 versus 4+3 and Gleason 8 versus 9. The hazard ratios relative to Gleason score 6 were 1.9, 5.1, 8.0, and 11.7 for Gleason scores 3+4, 4+3, 8, and 9-10, respectively. These differences were attenuated in the radiotherapy cohort as a whole due to increased adjuvant or neoadjuvant hormones for patients with high-grade disease but were clearly seen in patients undergoing radiotherapy only. A five-grade group system had the highest prognostic discrimination for all cohorts on both univariable and multivariable analysis. The major limitation was the unavoidable use of prostate-specific antigen BCR as an end point as opposed to cancer-related death. CONCLUSIONS The new PCa grading system has these benefits: more accurate grade stratification than current systems, simplified grading system of five grades, and lowest grade is 1, as opposed to 6, with the potential to reduce overtreatment of PCa. PATIENT SUMMARY We looked at outcomes for prostate cancer (PCa) treated with radical prostatectomy or radiation therapy and validated a new grading system with more accurate grade stratification than current systems, including a simplified grading system of five grades and a lowest grade is 1, as opposed to 6, with the potential to reduce overtreatment of PCa.
European Urology | 2012
Ashutosh Tewari; Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Daniel A. Bloch; Usha Seshadri-Kreaden; April E. Hebert; Peter Wiklund
CONTEXT Radical prostatectomy (RP) approaches have rarely been compared adequately with regard to margin and perioperative complication rates. OBJECTIVE Review the literature from 2002 to 2010 and compare margin and perioperative complication rates for open retropubic RP (ORP), laparoscopic RP (LRP), and robot-assisted LRP (RALP). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Summary data were abstracted from 400 original research articles representing 167,184 ORP, 57,303 LRP, and 62,389 RALP patients (total: 286,876). Articles were found through PubMed and Scopus searches and met a priori inclusion criteria (eg, surgery after 1990, reporting margin rates and/or perioperative complications, study size>25 cases). The primary outcomes were positive surgical margin (PSM) rates, as well as total intra- and perioperative complication rates. Secondary outcomes included blood loss, transfusions, conversions, length of hospital stay, and rates for specific individual complications. Weighted averages were compared for each outcome using propensity adjustment. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS After propensity adjustment, the LRP group had higher positive surgical margin rates than the RALP group but similar rates to the ORP group. LRP and RALP showed significantly lower blood loss and transfusions, and a shorter length of hospital stay than the ORP group. Total perioperative complication rates were higher for ORP and LRP than for RALP. Total intraoperative complication rates were low for all modalities but lowest for RALP. Rates for readmission, reoperation, nerve, ureteral, and rectal injury, deep vein thrombosis, pneumonia, hematoma, lymphocele, anastomotic leak, fistula, and wound infection showed significant differences between groups, generally favoring RALP. The lack of randomized controlled trials, use of margin status as an indicator of oncologic control, and inability to perform cost comparisons are limitations of this study. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis demonstrates that RALP is at least equivalent to ORP or LRP in terms of margin rates and suggests that RALP provides certain advantages, especially regarding decreased adverse events.
Clinical Nutrition | 2013
Yannick Cerantola; Massimo Valerio; Beata Persson; Patrice Jichlinski; Olle Ljungqvist; Martin Hübner; Wassim Kassouf; Stig Müller; Gabriele Baldini; Francesco Carli; Torvind Naesheimh; Lars M. Ytrebø; Arthur Revhaug; Kristoffer Lassen; Tore Knutsen; Erling Aarsether; Peter Wiklund; Hitendra R.H. Patel
PURPOSE Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have significantly reduced complications and length of hospital stay after colorectal procedures. This multimodal concept could probably be partially applied to major urological surgery. OBJECTIVES The primary objective was to systematically assess the evidence of ERAS single items and protocols applied to cystectomy patients. The secondary objective was to address a grade of recommendation to each item, based on the evidence and, if lacking, on consensus opinion from our ERAS Society working group. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION A systematic literature review was performed on ERAS for cystectomy by searching EMBASE and Medline. Relevant articles were selected and quality-assessed by two independent reviewers using the GRADE approach. If no study specific to cystectomy was available for any of the 22 given items, the authors evaluated whether colorectal guidelines could be extrapolated. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS Overall, 804 articles were retrieved from electronic databases. Fifteen articles were included in the present systematic review and 7 of 22 ERAS items were studied. Bowel preparation did not improve outcomes. Early nasogastric tube removal reduced morbidity, bowel recovery time and length of hospital stay. Doppler-guided fluid administration allowed for reduced morbidity. A quicker bowel recovery was observed with a multimodal prevention of ileus, including gum chewing, prevention of PONV and minimally invasive surgery. CONCLUSIONS ERAS has not yet been widely implemented in urology and evidence for individual interventions is limited or unavailable. The experience in other surgical disciplines encourages the development of an ERAS protocol for cystectomy.
The Journal of Urology | 2009
Kevin C. Zorn; Gagan Gautam; Arieh L. Shalhav; Ralph V. Clayman; Thomas E. Ahlering; David M. Albala; David I. Lee; Chandru P. Sundaram; Surena F. Matin; Erik P. Castle; Howard N. Winfield; Matthew T. Gettman; Benjamin R. Lee; Raju Thomas; Vipul R. Patel; Raymond J. Leveillee; Carson Wong; Gopal H. Badlani; Koon Ho Rha; Peter Wiklund; Alex Mottrie; Fatih Atug; Ali Riza Kural; Jean V. Joseph
PURPOSE With the exponential growth of robotic urological surgery, particularly with robot assisted radical prostatectomy, guidelines for safe initiation of this technology are a necessity. Currently no standardized credentialing system exists to our knowledge to evaluate surgeon competency and safety with robotic urological surgery performance. Although proctoring is a modality by which such competency can be evaluated, other training tools and guidelines are needed to ensure that the requisite knowledge and technical skills to perform this procedure have been acquired. We evaluated the current status of proctoring and credentialing in other surgical specialties to discuss and recommend its application and implementation specifically for robot assisted radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed the literature on safety and medicolegal implications of proctoring and the safe introduction of surgical procedures to develop recommendations for robot assisted radical prostatectomy proctoring and credentialing. RESULTS Proctoring is an essential mechanism for robot assisted radical prostatectomy institutional credentialing and should be a prerequisite for granting unrestricted privileges on the robot. This should be differentiated from preceptoring, wherein the expert is directly involved in hands-on training. Advanced technology has opened new avenues for long-distance observation through teleproctoring. Although the medicolegal implications of an active surgical intervention by a proctor are not clearly defined, the role as an observer should grant immunity from malpractice liability. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of guidelines and proctoring recommendations is necessary to protect surgeons, proctors, institutions and, above all, the patients who are associated with the institutional introduction of a robot assisted radical prostatectomy program. With no current guidelines we anticipate this article will serve as a catalyst of interorganizational discussion to initiate regulatory oversight of surgeon certification and proctorship.
BMJ | 2014
Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Tommy Nyberg; Olof Akre; Leif Haendler; Inge Heus; Mats Olsson; Stefan Carlsson; Monique J. Roobol; Gunnar Steineck; Peter Wiklund
Objective To compare the survival outcomes of patients treated with surgery or radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Design Observational study. Setting Sweden, 1996-2010. Participants 34 515 men primarily treated for prostate cancer with surgery (n=21 533) or radiotherapy (n=12 982). Patients were categorised by risk group (low, intermediate, high, and metastatic), age, and Charlson comorbidity score. Main outcome measures Cumulative incidence of mortality from prostate cancer and other causes. Competing risks regression hazard ratios for radiotherapy versus surgery were computed without adjustment and after propensity score and traditional (multivariable) adjustments, as well as after propensity score matching. Several sensitivity analyses were performed. Results Prostate cancer mortality became a larger proportion of overall mortality as risk group increased for both the surgery and the radiotherapy cohorts. Among patients with non-metastatic prostate cancer the adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio for prostate cancer mortality favoured surgery (1.76, 95% confidence interval 1.49 to 2.08, for radiotherapy v prostatectomy), whereas there was no discernible difference in treatment effect among men with metastatic disease. Subgroup analyses indicated more clear benefits of surgery among younger and fitter men with intermediate and high risk disease. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the main findings. Conclusions This large observational study with follow-up to 15 years suggests that for most men with non-metastatic prostate cancer, surgery leads to better survival than does radiotherapy. Younger men and those with less comorbidity who have intermediate or high risk localised prostate cancer might have a greater benefit from surgery.
European Urology | 2010
Matthew H. Hayn; Abid Hussain; Ahmed M. Mansour; Paul E. Andrews; Paul Carpentier; Erik P. Castle; Prokar Dasgupta; Peter Rimington; Raju Thomas; Shamim Khan; Adam S. Kibel; Hyung L. Kim; Murugesan Manoharan; Mani Menon; Alex Mottrie; David K. Ornstein; James O. Peabody; Raj S. Pruthi; Joan Palou Redorta; Lee Richstone; Francis Schanne; Hans Stricker; Peter Wiklund; Rameela Chandrasekhar; G. Wilding; Khurshid A. Guru
BACKGROUND Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has evolved as a minimally invasive alternative to open radical cystectomy for patients with invasive bladder cancer. OBJECTIVE We sought to define the learning curve for RARC by evaluating results from a multicenter, contemporary, consecutive series of patients who underwent this procedure. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Utilizing the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium database, a prospectively maintained and institutional review board-approved database, we identified 496 patients who underwent RARC by 21 surgeons at 14 institutions from 2003 to 2009. MEASUREMENTS Cut-off points for operative time, lymph node yield (LNY), estimated blood loss (EBL), and margin positivity were identified. Using specifically designed statistical mixed models, we were able to inversely predict the number of patients required for an institution to reach the predetermined cut-off points. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Mean operative time was 386 min, mean EBL was 408 ml, and mean LNY was 18. Overall, 34 of 482 patients (7%) had a positive surgical margin (PSM). Using statistical models, it was estimated that 21 patients were required for operative time to reach 6.5h and 8, 20, and 30 patients were required to reach an LNY of 12, 16, and 20, respectively. For all patients, PSM rates of <5% were achieved after 30 patients. For patients with pathologic stage higher than T2, PSM rates of <15% were achieved after 24 patients. CONCLUSIONS RARC is a challenging procedure but is a technique that is reproducible throughout multiple centers. This report helps to define the learning curve for RARC and demonstrates an acceptable level of proficiency by the 30th case for proxy measures of RARC quality.
European Urology | 2013
Raza Johar; Matthew H. Hayn; Andrew P. Stegemann; Kamran Ahmed; Piyush K. Agarwal; M. Derya Balbay; Ashok K. Hemal; Adam S. Kibel; Fred Muhletaler; Kenneth G. Nepple; John Pattaras; James O. Peabody; Joan Palou Redorta; Koon Ho Rha; Lee Richstone; Matthias Saar; Francis Schanne; Douglas S. Scherr; S. Siemer; Michael Stökle; Alon Z. Weizer; Peter Wiklund; Timothy Wilson; Michael Woods; Bertrum Yuh; Khurshid A. Guru
BACKGROUND Complication reporting is highly variable and nonstandardized. Therefore, it is imperative to determine the surgical outcomes of major oncologic procedures. OBJECTIVE To describe the complications after robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) using a standardized and validated reporting methodology. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Using the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium (IRCC) database, we identified 939 patients who underwent RARC, had available complication data, and had at least 90 d of follow-up. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Complications were analyzed and graded according to the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) system and were defined and stratified by organ system. Secondary outcomes included identification of preoperative and intraoperative variables predicting complications. Logistic regression models were used to define predictors of complications and readmission. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Forty-one percent (n=387) and 48% (n=448) of patients experienced a complication within 30 and 90 d of surgery, respectively. The highest grade of complication was grade 0 in 52%, grade 1-2 in 29%, and grade 3-5 in 19% patients. Gastrointestinal, infectious, and genitourinary complications were most common (27%, 23%, and 17%, respectively). On multivariable analysis, increasing age group, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and receipt of blood transfusion were independent predictors of any and high-grade complications, respectively. Thirty and 90-d mortality was 1.3% and 4.2%, respectively. As a multi-institutional database, a disparity in patient selection, operating standards, postoperative management, and reporting of complications can be considered a major limitation of the study. CONCLUSIONS Surgical morbidity after RARC is significant when reported using a standardized reporting methodology. The majority of complications are low grade. Strict reporting of complications is necessary to advocate for radical cystectomy (RC) and helps in patient counseling.
European Urology | 2015
Giacomo Novara; James Catto; Timothy Wilson; Magnus Annerstedt; Kevin Chan; Declan Murphy; Alexander Motttrie; James O. Peabody; Eila C. Skinner; Peter Wiklund; Khurshid A. Guru; Bertram Yuh
CONTEXT Although open radical cystectomy (ORC) is still the standard approach, laparoscopic radical cystectomy (LRC) and robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) have gained popularity. OBJECTIVE To report a systematic literature review and cumulative analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications of RARC in comparison with ORC and LRC. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched using a free-text protocol including the terms robot-assisted radical cystectomy or da Vinci radical cystectomy or robot* radical cystectomy. RARC case series and studies comparing RARC with either ORC or LRC were collected. Cumulative analysis was conducted. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS The searches retrieved 105 papers. According to the different diversion type, overall mean operative time ranged from 360 to 420 min. Similarly, mean blood loss ranged from 260 to 480 ml. Mean in-hospital stay was about 9 d for all diversion types, with consistently high readmission rates. In series reporting on RARC with either extracorporeal or intracorporeal conduit diversion, overall 90-d complication rates were 59% (high-grade complication: 15%). In series reporting RARC with intracorporeal continent diversion, the overall 30-d complication rate was 45.7% (high-grade complication: 28%). Reported mortality rates were ≤3% for all diversion types. Comparing RARC and ORC, cumulative analyses demonstrated shorter operative time for ORC, whereas blood loss and in-hospital stay were better with RARC (all p values <0.003). Moreover, 90-d complication rates of any-grade and 90-d grade 3 complication rates were lower for RARC (all p values <0.04), whereas high-grade complication and mortality rates were similar. CONCLUSIONS RARC can be performed safely with acceptable perioperative outcome, although complications are common. Cumulative analyses demonstrated that operative time was shorter with ORC, whereas RARC may provide some advantages in terms of blood loss and transfusion rates and, more limitedly, for postoperative complication rates over ORC and LRC. PATIENT SUMMARY Although open radical cystectomy (RC) is still regarded as a standard treatment for muscle-invasive bladder cancer, laparoscopic and robot-assisted RC are becoming more popular. Robotic RC can be safely performed with acceptably low risk of blood loss, transfusion, and intraoperative complications; however, as for open RC, the risk of postoperative complications is high, including a substantial risk of major complication and reoperation.
European Urology | 2015
Eva Haglind; Stefan Carlsson; Johan Stranne; Anna Wallerstedt; Ulrica Wilderäng; Thordis Thorsteinsdottir; Mikael Lagerkvist; Jan-Erik Damber; Anders Bjartell; Jonas Hugosson; Peter Wiklund; Gunnar Steineck
BACKGROUND Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has become widely used without high-grade evidence of superiority regarding long-term clinical outcomes compared with open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), the gold standard. OBJECTIVE To compare patient-reported urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction 12 mo after RALP or RRP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This was a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial of patients undergoing prostatectomy in 14 centres using RALP or RRP. Clinical-record forms and validated patient questionnaires at baseline and 12 mo after surgery were collected. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with logistic regression and adjusted for possible confounders. The primary end point was urinary incontinence (change of pad less than once in 24h vs one time or more per 24h) at 12 mo. Secondary end points were erectile dysfunction at 12 mo and positive surgical margins. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS At 12 mo after RALP, 366 men (21.3%) were incontinent, as were 144 (20.2%) after RRP. The unadjusted OR was 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87–1.34). Erectile dysfunction was observed in 1200 men (70.4%) 12 mo after RALP and 531 (74.7%) after RRP. The unadjusted OR was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.66–0.98). CONCLUSIONS In a Swedish setting, RALP for prostate cancer was modestly beneficial in preserving erectile function compared with RRP, without a statistically significant difference regarding urinary incontinence or surgical margins. PATIENT SUMMARY We compared patient-reported urinary incontinence after prostatectomy with two types of surgical technique. There was no statistically significant improvement in the rate of urinary leakage, but there was a small improvement regarding erectile function after robot-assisted operation.
European Urology | 2014
Kamran Ahmed; Shahid Khan; Matthew H. Hayn; Piyush K. Agarwal; Ketan K. Badani; M. Derya Balbay; Erik P. Castle; Prokar Dasgupta; Reza Ghavamian; Khurshid A. Guru; Ashok K. Hemal; Brent K. Hollenbeck; Adam S. Kibel; Mani Menon; Alex Mottrie; Kenneth G. Nepple; John Pattaras; James O. Peabody; Vassilis Poulakis; Raj S. Pruthi; Joan Palou Redorta; Koon Ho Rha; Lee Richstone; Matthias Saar; Douglas S. Scherr; S. Siemer; Michael Stoeckle; Eric Wallen; Alon Z. Weizer; Peter Wiklund
BACKGROUND Intracorporeal urinary diversion (ICUD) has the potential benefits of a smaller incision, reduced pain, decreased bowel exposure, and reduced risk of fluid imbalance. OBJECTIVE To compare the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing extracorporeal urinary diversion (ECUD) and ICUD following robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We reviewed the database of the International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium (IRCC) (18 international centers), with 935 patients who had undergone RARC and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) between 2003 and 2011. INTERVENTION All patients within the IRCC underwent RARC and PLND as indicated. The urinary diversion was performed either intracorporeally or extracorporeally. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS Demographic data, perioperative outcomes, and complications in patients undergoing ICUD or ECUD were compared. All patients had at least a 90-d follow-up. The Fisher exact test was used to summarize categorical variables and the Wilcoxon rank sum test or Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Of 935 patients who had RARC and PLND, 167 patients underwent ICUD (ileal conduit: 106; neobladder: 61), and 768 patients had an ECUD (ileal conduit: 570; neobladder: 198). Postoperative complications data were available for 817 patients, with a minimum follow-up of 90 d. There was no difference in age, gender, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, or rate of prior abdominal surgery between the groups. The operative time was equivalent (414 min), with the median hospital stay being marginally longer for the ICUD group (9 d vs 8 d, p=0.086). No difference in the reoperation rates at 30 d was noted between the groups. The 90-d complication rate was not significant between the two groups, but a trend favoring ICUD over ECUD was noted (41% vs 49%, p=0.05). Gastrointestinal complications were significantly lower in the ICUD group (p ≤ 0.001). Patients with ICUD were at a lower risk of experiencing a postoperative complication at 90 d (32%) (odds ratio: 0.68; 95% confidence interval, 0.50-0.94; p=0.02). Being a retrospective study was the main limitation. CONCLUSIONS Robot-assisted ICUD can be accomplished safely, with comparable outcomes to open urinary diversion. In this cohort, patients undergoing ICUD had a relatively lower risk of complications.