Supra-pubic versus urethral catheter after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: systematic review of current evidence

Complex Foley Catheter Placement After Radical Prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

To describe a method for replacement of a dislodged critical urethral foley catheter following a robotic- assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND

Following robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP), a bladder drainage via catheter is necessary to allow for proper healing of the urethrovesical anastomosis. In most cases, this is done using a transurethral foley catheter.^1,2 Early traumatic loss of the urethral catheter following RALP is consider a urologic emergency and can lead to vesicourethral anastomotic urine leak, ileus, infection or abscess, and future anastomotic stenosis.³ Replacing the urethral catheter in this situation can be difficult even in experienced hands and often requires imaging assistance.

METHOD

A 53-year-old male with Grade Group 4 (Gleason 4 + 4) prostate cancer underwent an uncomplicated RALP. During his post-operative course, his urethral foley catheter fell out or was traumatically removed three times resulting in disruption of the posterior anastomosis. To replace the urethral catheter and prevent it from being dislodged again, a transabdominal approach under ultrasound and cystoscopic guidance was employed to replace the catheter into the bladder and secure it trans abdominally using a single G-tube safety Pexy T fastener.

CONCLUSION

This case reports describes a technique used to replace and secure a urethral foley catheter in a patient who suffered from a posterior anastomotic disruption following repeated loss and traumatic removal of his urethral foley catheter during his RALP post-operative course. While replacement of a dislodged urethral foley catheter following a RALP can be challenging, the catheter can safely be placed and secured trans abdominally in these rare but serious situations where the conventional catheter secure devices and patient education alone are not sufficient to prevent removal.

The impact of 3D models on positive surgical margins after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the role of 3D models on positive surgical margin rate (PSM) rate in patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) compared to a no-3D control group. Secondarily, we evaluated the postoperative functional and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

Prospective study enrolling patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) undergoing RARP with mp-MRI-based 3D model reconstruction, displayed in a cognitive or augmented-reality fashion, at our Centre from 01/2016 to 01/2020. A control no-3D group was extracted from the last two years of our Institutional RARP database. PSMr between the two groups was evaluated and multivariable linear regression (MLR) models were applied. Finally, Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to calculate biochemical recurrence at 12 months after the intervention.

RESULTS

160 patients were enrolled in the 3D Group, while 640 were selected for the Control Group. A more conservative NS approach was registered in the 3D Group (full NS 20.6% vs 12.7%; intermediate NS 38.1% vs 38.0%; standard NS 41.2% vs 49.2%; p = 0.02). 3D Group patients had lower PSM rates (25 vs. 35.1%, p = 0.01). At MLR models, the availability of 3D technology (p = 0.005) and the absence of extracapsular extension (ECE, p = 0.004) at mp-MRI were independent predictors of lower PSMr. Moreover, 3D model represented a significant protective factor for PSM in patients with ECE or pT3 disease.

CONCLUSION

The availability of 3D models during the intervention allows to modulate the NS approach, limiting the occurrence of PSM, especially in patients with ECE at mp-MRI or pT3 PCa.

Early urinary continence recovery following retzius-sparing robotic-assistant radical prostatectomy with suprapubic catheter: a short-term follow-up outcome

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the recovery of early urinary continence in patients with prostate cancer using a suprapubic catheter during Retzius-sparing robotic-assistant laparoscopic prostatectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2018 to January 2019, 223 patients diagnosed with prostate cancer who underwent Retzius-sparing robotic-assistant laparoscopic prostatectomy in Diakonie Klinikum Stuttgart were involved in our study. From January 2018 to June 2018, patients (112 cases) only had an indwelling urinary catheter during Retzius-sparing robotic-assistant laparoscopic prostatectomy, while from July 2018 to January 2019, patients (111 cases) were offered an extra suprapubic catheter during operation. The recovery of early urinary continence of patients was mainly investigated one month later.

RESULTS

The overall early urinary continence rate was 81.61%. Patients with suprapubic catheter had better urinary control results, compared to patients with only indwelling urinary catheter (87.39% vs 75.89%, p = 0.027). In addition, International Prostate Symptom Score and irritative subscore in patients with good urinary control were significantly lower than that in patients with urinary incontinence. Suprapubic catheter insertion (OR 0.395; 95% CI 0.190-0.821) and advanced pathological tumor stage (T3a-T4) (OR 2.061; 95% CI 1.008-4.217) were two independent influencing factors for early urinary continence recovery in patients who underwent Retzius-sparing robotic-assistant laparoscopic prostatectomy through multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

Suprapubic catheter insertion may be helpful for early urinary continence recovery in patients with Retzius-sparing Robotic-assistant laparoscopic prostatectomy. Advanced pathological tumor stage (T3a-T4) before Retzius-sparing robotic-assistant laparoscopic prostatectomy might be associated with poor urinary control.

[Radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, perioperative management by French urologists in 2018]

INTRODUCTION

Prostatectomy (PT) is a common procedure performed by many urologists. In 2018, 20,207 prostatectomies were performed in France, and few studies evaluated the perioperative habits of urologists. As part of writing guidelines for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) we wished to evaluate practice of urologists in their hospital management of a prostatectomy.

MATERIEL AND METHODS

A questionnaire was sent by Survey Monkey in June and July 2018 to all urologists who are members of the French Association of Urology.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty seven urologists (14%) answered the questionnaire, 62% have private practice. The average number of operators per center performing PT was 4, with a median number of 70 interventions (0 to 486) per center in 2018. Open surgery is still gold standard (39.13%), followed by the robot-assisted transperitoneal laparoscopic (34.78%) and standard laparoscopic (24.22%). Alimentation, like first stand-up, was re-established on the first post-operative day, and the average hospital stay was 4±2 nights. The removal of the bladder catheter was most often performed at home by nurse (49.06%), one week after surgery. Only 10.06% of urologists systematically perform a cystography before removal urinary catheter.

CONCLUSION

The perioperative management of prostatectomy in France is relatively homogeneous, between urologists. The length of hospital stay remains important and could be reduced by proposing an ERAS protocol as has been obtained for cystectomy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Suprapubic Versus Urethral Catheter for Urinary Drainage After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the evidence regarding the usage of suprapubic tube (SPT) versus indwelling urethral catheter (IUC) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

RECENT FINDINGS

Available data on the use of SPT for urinary drainage after RARP is somewhat limited mostly because of the variations of study designs and non-standardized outcomes. Although it may provide some mild benefit in terms of catheter-related pain and discomfort, the benefit seems not to be clinically significant. The evidence in the literature so far does not support routine usage of SPT as the primary urinary drainage method after RARP. Further higher-quality studies that can show clinically significant advantages over IUC are still needed to justify its usage.

Superior early and long-term continence following early micturition on day 2 after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a randomized prospective trial

PURPOSE

To elucidate early and long-term continence and patient comfort depending on type and duration of catheterization after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

198 patients were randomized prospectively into three groups (May 2016-July 2017): A transurethral catheter with micturition on postoperative day (POD) 5 was placed in the control group (TD5); a suprapubic tube (SPT) with micturition on POD 5 was placed in the group SD5 or with micturition on POD 2 in group SD2, respectively. Questionnaires were used for catheter-related satisfaction. Functional outcome analysis included residual volume analysis, uroflowmetry, IPSS, 12-h pad test, and daily pad use. Follow-up was conducted up to 12 months.

RESULTS

Postoperative comfort and catheter-related complications were similar in the three groups. However, on the day of catheter removal, continence was significantly better in the 12-h pad test for the SD2 group with 14 ml vs. 30 ml (TD5) and 24 ml (SD5), p = 0.007. Median residual urine volume between the groups was comparable with 17 ml in TD5, 7 ml in SD5, and 11 ml in SD2, (p = 0.07). Postoperative IPSS did not differ significantly in the follow-up period. After 4 weeks, 63% of the patients in SD2 were continent (no pad/day) compared to 33% in TD5 and 41% in SD5, p = 0.004. After 12 months, 76% were continent in TD5, 87% in SD5, and 94% in SD2, p = 0.023.

CONCLUSIONS

Early micturition after SPT placement in robotic radical prostatectomy seems to be beneficial without an increased risk of complications.

The effect of intrathecal bupivacaine/morphine on quality of recovery in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a randomised controlled trial

Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy causes discomfort in the immediate postoperative period. This randomised controlled trial investigated if intrathecal bupivacaine/morphine, in addition to general anaesthesia, could be beneficial for the postoperative quality of recovery. One hundred and fifty‐five patients were randomly allocated to an intervention group that received intrathecal 12.5 mg bupivacaine/300 μg morphine (20% dose reduction in patients > 75 years) or a control group receiving a subcutaneous sham injection and an intravenous loading dose of 0.1 mg.kg⁻¹ morphine. Both groups received standardised general anaesthesia and the same postoperative analgesic regimen. The primary outcome was a decrease in the Quality of Recovery‐15 (QoR‐15) questionnaire score on postoperative day 1. The intervention group (n = 76) had less reduction in QoR‐15 on postoperative day 1; median (IQR [range]) 10% (1–8 [−60% to 50%]) vs. 13% (5–24 [−6% to 50%]), p = 0.019, and used less morphine during the admission; 2 mg (1–7 [0–41 mg]) vs. 15 mg (12–20 [8–61 mg]), p < 0.001. Furthermore, they perceived lower pain scores during exertion; numeric rating scale (NRS) 3 (1–6 [0–9]) vs. 5 (3–7 [0–9]), p = 0.001; less bladder spasms (NRS 1 (0–2 [0–10]) vs. 2 (0–5 [0–10]), p = 0.001 and less sedation; NRS 2 (0–3 [0–10]) vs. 3 (2–6 [0–10]), p = 0.005. Moreover, the intervention group used less rescue medication. Pruritus was more severe in the intervention group; NRS 4 (1–7 [0–10]) vs. 0 (0–1 [0–10]), p = 0.000. We conclude that despite a modest increase in the incidence of pruritus, multimodal pain management with intrathecal bupivacaine/morphine remains a viable option for robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy.