We report a 1-year update of functional urinary and sexual recovery, oncologic outcomes and postoperative complications in patients who completed a randomized controlled trial comparing posterior ...(Retzius sparing) with anterior robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
A total of 120 patients with clinically low-intermediate risk prostate cancer were randomized to undergo robot-assisted radical prostatectomy via the posterior and anterior approach in 60 each. Surgery was performed by a single surgical team at an academic institution. An independent third party ascertained urinary and sexual function outcomes preoperatively, and 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Oncologic outcomes consisted of positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence-free survival. Biochemical recurrence was defined as 2 postoperative prostate specific antigen values of 0.2 ng/ml or greater.
Median age of the cohort was 61 years and median followup was 12 months. At 12 months in the anterior vs posterior prostatectomy groups there were no statistically significant differences in the urinary continence rate (0 to 1 security pad per day in 93.3% vs 98.3%, p = 0.09), 24-hour pad weight (median 12 vs 7.5 gm, p = 0.3), erection sufficient for intercourse (69.2% vs 86.5%) or postoperative Sexual Health Inventory for Men score 17 or greater (44.6% vs 44.1%). In the posterior vs anterior prostatectomy groups a nonfocal positive surgical margin was found in 11.7% vs 8.3%, biochemical recurrence-free survival probability was 0.84 vs 0.93 and postoperative complications developed in 18.3% vs 11.7%.
Among patients with clinically low-intermediate risk prostate cancer randomized to anterior (Menon) or posterior (Bocciardi) approach robot-assisted radical prostatectomy the differences in urinary continence seen at 3 months were muted at the 12-month followup. Sexual function recovery, postoperative complication and biochemical recurrence rates were comparable 1 year postoperatively.
Abstract Context Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) was proposed to improve functional outcomes in comparison with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical ...prostatectomy (LRP). In the initial RARP series, 12-mo urinary continence recovery rates ranged from 84% to 97%. However, the few available studies comparing RARP with RRP or LRP published before 2008 did not permit any definitive conclusions about the superiority of any one of these techniques in terms of urinary continence recovery. Objective The aims of this systematic review were (1) to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for urinary incontinence after RARP, (2) to identify surgical techniques able to improve urinary continence recovery after RARP, and (3) to perform a cumulative analysis of all available studies comparing RARP versus RRP or LRP in terms of the urinary continence recovery rate. Evidence acquisition A literature search was performed in August 2011 using the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The Medline search included only a free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy across the title and abstract fields of the records. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publication date from January 1, 2008. Searches of the Embase and Web of Science databases used the same free-text protocol, keywords, and search period. Only comparative studies or clinical series including >100 cases reporting urinary continence outcomes were included in this review. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager v.4.2 software designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Evidence synthesis We analyzed 51 articles reporting urinary continence rates after RARP: 17 case series, 17 studies comparing different techniques in the context of RARP, 9 studies comparing RARP with RRP, and 8 studies comparing RARP with LRP. The 12-mo urinary incontinence rates ranged from 4% to 31%, with a mean value of 16% using a no pad definition. Considering a no pad or safety pad definition, the incidence ranged from 8% to 11%, with a mean value of 9%. Age, body mass index, comorbidity index, lower urinary tract symptoms, and prostate volume were the most relevant preoperative predictors of urinary incontinence after RARP. Only a few comparative studies evaluated the impact of different surgical techniques on urinary continence recovery after RARP. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction with or without anterior reconstruction was associated with a small advantage in urinary continence recovery 1 mo after RARP. Only complete reconstruction was associated with a significant advantage in urinary continence 3 mo after RARP (odds ratio OR: 0.76; p = 0.04). Cumulative analyses showed a better 12-mo urinary continence recovery after RARP in comparison with RRP (OR: 1.53; p = 0.03) or LRP (OR: 2.39; p = 0.006). Conclusions The prevalence of urinary incontinence after RARP is influenced by preoperative patient characteristics, surgeon experience, surgical technique, and methods used to collect and report data. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction seems to offer a slight advantage in terms of 1-mo urinary continence recovery. Update of a previous systematic review of literature shows, for the first time, a statistically significant advantage in favor of RARP in comparison with both RRP and LRP in terms of 12-mo urinary continence recovery.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
This study aimed to provide an update and compare perioperative outcomes and complications of intracorporeal and extracorporeal urinary diversion following robot-assisted radical cystectomy using ...data from the multi-institutional, prospectively maintained International Robotic Cystectomy Consortium database.
We retrospectively reviewed the records of 2,125 patients from a total of 26 institutions. Intracorporeal urinary diversion was compared with extracorporeal urinary diversion. Multivariate logistic regression models using stepwise variable selection were fit to evaluate preoperative, operative and postoperative predictors of intracorporeal urinary diversion, operative time, high grade complications and 90-day hospital readmissions after robot-assisted radical cystectomy.
In our cohort 1,094 patients (51%) underwent intracorporeal urinary diversion. These patients demonstrated shorter operative time (357 vs 400 minutes), less blood loss (300 vs 350 ml) and fewer blood transfusions (4% vs 19%, all p <0.001). They experienced more high grade complications (13% vs 10%, p = 0.02). Intracorporeal urinary diversion use increased from 9% of all urinary diversions in 2005 to 97% in 2015. Complications after this procedure decreased significantly with time (p <0.001). On multivariable analysis higher annual cystectomy volume (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01–1.03, p <0.002), year of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (2013–2016 OR 68, 95% CI 44–105, p <0.001) and American Society of Anesthesiologists® score less than 3 (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.38–2.22, p <0.001) were associated with undergoing intracorporeal urinary diversion. The procedure was associated with a shorter operative time of 27 minutes (p = 0.001).
The use of intracorporeal urinary diversion has increased in the last decade. A higher annual institutional volume of robot-assisted radical cystectomy was associated with intracorporeal urinary diversion as well as with shorter operative time. Although intracorporeal urinary diversion was associated with higher grade complications than extracorporeal urinary diversion, they decreased with time.
Abstract Background Although the initial robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) series showed 12-mo potency rates ranging from 70% to 80%, the few available comparative studies did not permit ...any definitive conclusion about the superiority of this technique when compared with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Objectives The aims of this systematic review were (1) to evaluate the current prevalence and the potential risk factors of erectile dysfunction after RARP, (2) to identify surgical techniques able to improve the rate of potency recovery after RARP, and (3) to perform a cumulative analysis of all available studies comparing RARP versus RRP or LRP. Evidence acquisition A literature search was performed in August 2011 using the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Only comparative studies or clinical series including >100 cases reporting potency recovery outcomes were included in this review. Cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager v.4.2 software designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Evidence synthesis We analyzed 15 case series, 6 studies comparing different techniques in the context of RARP, 6 studies comparing RARP with RRP, and 4 studies comparing RARP with LRP. The 12- and 24-mo potency rates ranged from 54% to 90% and from 63% to 94%, respectively. Age, baseline potency status, comorbidities index, and extension of the nerve-sparing procedure represent the most relevant preoperative and intraoperative predictors of potency recovery after RARP. Available data seem to support the use of cautery-free dissection or the use of pinpointed low-energy cauterization. Cumulative analyses showed better 12-mo potency rates after RARP in comparison with RRP (odds ratio OR: 2.84; 95% confidence interval CI: 1.46–5.43; p = 0.002). Only a nonstatistically significant trend in favor of RARP was reported after comparison with LRP (OR: 1.89; p = 0.21). Conclusions The incidence of potency recovery after RARP is influenced by numerous factors. Data coming from the present systematic review support the use of a cautery-free technique. This update of previous systematic reviews of the literature showed, for the first time, a significant advantage in favor of RARP in comparison with RRP in terms of 12-mo potency rates.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Abstract Background More than a decade since its inception, the benefits and cost efficiency of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) continue to elicit controversy. Objective To compare ...outcomes and costs between RARP and open RP (ORP). Design, setting, and participants A cohort study of 629 593 men who underwent RP for localized prostate cancer at 449 hospitals in the USA from 2003 to 2013, using the Premier Hospital Database. Intervention RARP was ascertained through a review of the hospital charge description master for robotic supplies. Outcome measures and statistical analysis Outcomes were 90-d postoperative complications (Clavien), blood product transfusions, operating room time (ORT), length of stay (LOS), and direct hospital costs. Propensity-weighted regression analyses accounting for clustering by hospitals and survey weighting ensured nationally representative estimates. Results and limitations RARP utilization rapidly increased from 1.8% in 2003 to 85% in 2013 ( p < 0.001). RARP patients ( n = 311 135) were less likely to experience any complications (odds ratio OR 0.68, p < 0.001) or prolonged LOS (OR 0.28, p < 0.001), or to receive blood products (OR 0.33, p = 0.002) compared to ORP patients ( n = 318 458). The adjusted mean ORT was 131 min longer for RARP ( p = 0.002). The 90-d direct hospital costs were higher for RARP (+$4528, p < 0.001), primarily attributed to operating room and supplies costs. Costs were no longer signficantly different between ORP and RARP among the highest-volume surgeons (≥104 cases/yr; +$1990, p = 0.40) and highest-volume hospitals (≥318 cases/yr; +$1225, p = 0.39). Limitations include the lack of oncologic characteristics and the retrospective nature of the study. Conclusions Our contemporary analysis reveals that RARP confers a perioperative morbidity advantage at higher cost. In the absence of large randomized trials because of the widespread adoption of RARP, this retrospective study represents the best available evidence for the morbidity and cost profile of RARP versus ORP. Patient summary In this large study of men with prostate cancer who underwent either open or robotic radical prostatectomy, we found that robotic surgery has a better morbidity profile but costs more.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Using institutional data, we have previously developed an algorithm to identify the optimal candidates for adjuvant radiotherapy (aRT) among men with pN1 prostate cancer (PCa) at radical ...prostatectomy (RP). This study aimed to test the external validity of our previous findings using a nationwide database while focusing on overall mortality as an endpoint. To this end, we identified 5498 pN1 PCa patients who were treated with RP, pelvic lymph node dissection, and androgen deprivation therapy with or without aRT, within the National Cancer Database, between 2004 and 2015. Patients were divided into five groups based on our previously published algorithm. Similar to our previous report, multivariable Cox regression analysis showed that only two of these groups benefit from aRT: (1) those with one to two positive nodes, pathological Gleason score 7–10, and pT3b/4 disease or positive surgical margins (hazard ratio HR=0.75); and (2) those with three to four positive nodes, regardless of local tumor characteristics (HR=0.57, both p=0.01). In the remaining patients (25% of the cohort), aRT had no significant survival benefit. Results were confirmed on sensitivity analyses using 1:1 propensity score-matched cohorts, excluding men who died within 3 yr of surgery and using cut-off of 6 mo post-surgery to identify receipt of aRT. Our findings corroborate the validity of our previously published criteria and highlight the importance of patient selection in pN1 PCa patients who are considered for aRT.
When considering prostate cancer patients with node positive-disease at surgery for adjuvant radiotherapy, select patients wisely. Local disease characteristics and number of positive nodes play a key role in determining who will benefit from such a treatment.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Abstract Context Despite the wide diffusion of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP), only few studies comparing the results of these ...techniques with the retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) are currently available. Objective To evaluate the perioperative, functional, and oncologic results in the comparative studies evaluating RRP, LRP, and RALP. Evidence acquisition A systematic review of the literature was performed in January 2008, searching Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. A “free-text” protocol using the term radical prostatectomy was applied. Some 4000 records were retrieved from the Medline database; 2265 records were retrieved from the Embase database;, and 4219 records were retrieved from the Web of Science database. Three of the authors reviewed the records to identify comparative studies. A cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v.4.2 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Evidence synthesis Thirty-seven comparative studies were identified in the literature search, including a single, randomised, controlled trial. With regard to the perioperative outcome, LRP and RALP were more time consuming than RRP, especially in the initial steps of the learning curve, but blood loss, transfusion rates, catheterisation time, hospitalisation duration, and complication rates all favoured LRP. With regard to the functional results, LRP and RRP showed similar continence and potency rates. Similarly, no significant differences were identified between LRP and RALP, while a single, nonrandomised, prospective study suggested advantages in terms of both continence and potency recovery after RALP, compared with RRP. With regard to the oncologic outcome, LRP and RALP were associated with positive surgical margin rates similar to those of RRP. Conclusions The quality of the available comparative studies was not excellent. LRP and RALP are followed by significantly lower blood loss and transfusion rates, but the available data were not sufficient to prove the superiority of any surgical approach in terms of functional and oncologic outcomes. Further high-quality, prospective, multicentre, comparative studies are needed.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Abstract Context Pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in prostate cancer is the most effective method for detecting lymph node metastases. However, a decline in the rate of PLND during radical ...prostatectomy (RP) has been noted. This is likely the result of prostate cancer stage migration in the prostate-specific antigen-screening era, and the introduction of minimally invasive approaches such as robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Objective To assess the efficacy, limitations, and complications of PLND during RARP. Evidence acquisition A review of the literature was performed using the Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science databases with no restriction of language from January 1990 to December 2012. The literature search used the following terms: prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy, robot-assisted , and lymph node dissection. Evidence synthesis The median value of nodal yield at PLND during RARP ranged from 3 to 24 nodes. As seen in open and laparoscopic RP series, the lymph node positivity rate increased with the extent of dissection during RARP. Overall, PLND-only related complications are rare. The most frequent complication after PLND is symptomatic pelvic lymphocele, with occurrence ranging from 0% to 8% of cases. The rate of PLND-associated grade 3–4 complications ranged from 0% to 5%. PLND is associated with increased operative time. Available data suggest equivalence of PLND between RARP and other surgical approaches in terms of nodal yield, node positivity, and intraoperative and postoperative complications. Conclusions PLND during RARP can be performed effectively and safely. The overall number of nodes removed, the likelihood of node positivity, and the types and rates of complications of PLND are similar to pure laparoscopic and open retropubic procedures.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Abstract Context Despite the large diffusion of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), literature and data on the oncologic outcome of RARP are limited. Objective Evaluate lymph node yield, ...positive surgical margins (PSMs), use of adjuvant therapy, and biochemical recurrence (BCR)–free survival following RARP and perform a cumulative analysis of all studies comparing the oncologic outcomes of RARP and retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). Evidence acquisition A systematic review of the literature was performed in August 2011, searching Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. A free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy was applied. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publications dating from January 1, 2008. A cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager software v.4.2 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK) and Stata 11.0 SE software (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA). Evidence synthesis We retrieved 79 papers evaluating oncologic outcomes following RARP. The mean PSM rate was 15% in all comers and 9% in pathologically localized cancers, with some tumor characteristics being the most relevant predictors of PSMs. Several surgeon-related characteristics or procedure-related issues may play a major role in PSM rates. With regard to BCR, the very few papers with a follow-up duration >5 yr demonstrated 7-yr BCR-free survival estimates of approximately 80%. Finally, all the cumulative analyses comparing RARP with RRP and comparing RARP with LRP demonstrated similar overall PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: odds ratio OR: 1.21; p = 0.19; RARP vs LRP: OR: 1.12; p = 0.47), pT2 PSM rates (RARP vs RRP: OR: 1.25; p = 0.31; RARP vs LRP: OR: 0.99; p = 0.97), and BCR-free survival estimates (RARP vs RRP: hazard ratio HR: 0.9; p = 0.526; RARP vs LRP: HR: 0.5; p = 0.141), regardless of the surgical approach. Conclusions PSM rates are similar following RARP, RRP, and LRP. The few data available on BCR from high-volume centers are promising, but definitive comparisons with RRP or LRP are not currently possible. Finally, significant data on cancer-specific mortality are not currently available.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
Over the years, several techniques for performing robot-assisted prostatectomy have been implemented in an effort to achieve optimal oncological and functional outcomes.
To provide an evidence-based ...description and video-based illustration of currently available dissection techniques for robotic prostatectomy.
A literature search was performed to retrieve articles describing different surgical approaches and techniques for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and to analyze data supporting their use. Video material was provided by experts in the field to illustrate these approaches and techniques.
Multiple surgical approaches are available: extraperitoneal, transvesical, transperitoneal posterior, transperitoneal anterior, Retzius sparing, and transperineal. Surgical techniques for prostatic dissection sensu strictu are the following: omission of the endopelvic fascia dissection, bladder neck preservation, incremental nerve sparing by means of an antegrade or retrograde approach, and preservation of the puboprostatic ligaments and dorsal venous complex. Recently, techniques for total or partial prostatectomy have been described.
Different surgical approaches and techniques for robotic prostatectomy have been analyzed.
Two randomized controlled trials evaluating the extraperitoneal versus the transperitoneal approach have demonstrated similar results. Level I evidence on the Retzius-sparing approach demonstrated earlier return to continence than the traditional anterior approach. The question whether Retzius-sparing RARP is associated with a higher rate of positive surgical margins is still open due to the intrinsic bias in terms of surgical expertise in the available comparative studies. This technique also offers an advantage in patients who have received kidney transplantation. Retrospective evidence suggests that the more the anatomical dissection (eg., more periprostatic tissue is preserved), the better the functional outcome in terms of continence. Yet, two randomized controlled trials evaluating the different techniques of dissection have so far been produced. Partial prostatectomies should not be offered outside clinical trials.
Several techniques and approaches are available for prostate dissection during RARP. While the Retzius-sparing approach seems to provide earlier return to continence than the traditional anterior transperitoneal approach, no technique has been proved to be superior to other(s) in terms of long-term outcomes in randomized studies.
We have summarized available approaches for the surgical treatment of prostate cancer. Specifically, we described the different techniques that can be adopted for the surgical removal of the prostate using robotic technology.
Full text
Available for:
GEOZS, IJS, IMTLJ, KILJ, KISLJ, NUK, OILJ, PNG, SAZU, SBCE, SBJE, UL, UM, UPCLJ, UPUK
PDF
