Impact of a preoperatively estimated prostate volume using transrectal ultrasonography on surgical and oncological outcomes in a single surgeon’s experience with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Impact of Prostate Size on the Functional and Oncological Outcomes of Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is the main surgical approach for treatment of prostate cancer in the USA. Prostate size is always depicted as a factor affecting the outcomes of RARP as shown by many studies, but these studies are limited to a small number of patients. Our aim was to evaluate functional and oncologic outcomes of RARP across varying prostate size measured as prostate specimen weight.

METHODS

A cohort of 14 481 patients who underwent RARP in a single center was divided into four groups according to prostate specimen weight: group 1, <50 g; group 2, 50-100 g; group 3, 100-150 g; and group 4, >150 g. Perioperative and postoperative variables and pathological and functional outcomes were compared among the four groups. Cumulative incidence functions were plotted to visualize the distribution of event-time variables among the groups, and differences were evaluated using the log-rank test.

KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS

Patients with larger prostates (groups 3 and 4) were more likely to have higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA), lower biopsy grade group, and worse baseline urinary and sexual characteristics. Group 4 had lower rates of full nerve-sparing surgery (13.7% vs 38.3%) and lymph node dissection (51.3% vs 71.4%), more pT2 disease (69.8% vs 60.3%), less pT3 disease (30.2% vs 39.7%), and lower rates of positive surgical margins (12.8% vs 19.3%) and biochemical recurrence (5.9% vs 7.5%) than group 1. Finally, we observed differences in functional outcomes among the groups for greater prostate size, and patients in group 4 had worse rates of urinary continence (77.8% vs 89.5%) and recovery of sexual function (70.0% vs 84.1%) than group 1. Our study is limited by its retrospective design.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

The results demonstrate that in this large cohort of patients, greater prostate size affects multiple outcomes, including the rate of nerve-sparing surgery, potency and continence recovery, and oncological and pathological outcomes. These data will be valuable when counseling patients regarding possible RARP outcomes and the timeline for recovery.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Our study shows that prostate size can affect the outcomes of robot-assisted removal of the prostate for patients with prostate cancer. Larger prostate size can be associated with worse functional outcomes after surgery.

Prostate Volume Influence on Postoperative Outcomes for Patients Undergoing RARP: A Monocentric Serial Analysis of 500 Cases

Elevated prostate volume is considered to negatively influence postoperative outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). We aim to investigate the influence of prostate volume on readmissions and complications after RARP. Methods: A total of 500 consecutive patients who underwent RARP between April 2019 and August 2022 were included. Patients were dichotomized into two groups using a prostate volume cut-off of 50 mL (small and normal prostate (SNP) n = 314, 62.8%; large prostate n = 186, 37.2%). Demographic, baseline, and perioperative data were analyzed. The postoperative complications and readmission rates within 90 days after RARP were compared between groups. A univariate linear analysis was performed to investigate the association between prostate volume and other relevant outcomes. Results: Patients with larger prostates had a higher IPSS score, and therefore, more relevant LUTS at the baseline. They had higher ASA scores (p = 0.015). They also had more catheter days (mean 6.6 days for SNP vs. 7.5 days for LP) (p = 0.041). All oncological outcomes were similar between the groups. Although statistical analysis showed no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.062), a trend for minor complications in patients with larger prostates, n = 37/186 (19.8%) for the LP group vs. n = 37/314 (11.7%) in the SNP group, was observed. Namely, acute urinary retention and secondary anastomosis insufficiency. Major complications with an SNP (4.4%) and LP (3.7%) (p = 0.708) and readmissions with an SNP (6.25%) and LP (4.2%) (p = 0.814) were infrequent and distributed equally between the groups. In univariate analysis, prostate volume could solely predict a longer console time (p = 0.005). Conclusions: A higher prostate volume appears to have minimal influence on the perioperative course after RARP. It can prolong catheter days and increase the incidence of minor complications such as acute urinary retention. However, it might predict minor changes in operating time. Yet, prostate volume has less influence on major complications, readmissions, or oncological results.

Impact of Prostate Size on the Outcomes of Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Prostate size can vary widely among men regardless of whether they have prostate cancer or not. Many studies reported very conflicting results regarding the impact of prostate size on the outcome of radical prostatectomy. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis on this topic to investigate the impact of prostate size on the operative, functional and oncological outcomes of radical prostatectomy. In general, a smaller prostate can be associated with fewer surgical complications, but with a higher chance of positive surgical margins. This can be useful when counseling patients before surgery.

Abstract

Background: The impact of prostate size on the radical prostatectomy outcome is not clear. Several published reports have shown conflicting results. Objectives: To investigate the effect of prostate size on the surgical, functional and oncological results of radical prostatectomy. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in accordance with the PRISMA criteria. Finally, we investigated the research that reported on the impact of prostate size on radical prostatectomy outcome. The Review Manager (RevMan) software version 5.4 was utilized for statistical analysis. Results: Eighteen studies including 12,242 patients were included. Estimated blood loss was significantly less with smaller prostates (Z = 3.01; p = 0.003). The complications rate was 17% with larger prostates, compared to 10% for smaller prostates (Z = 5.73; p < 0.00001). Seventy-three percent of patients with a smaller prostate were continent within one month, compared to 64% with a larger prostate (Z = 1.59; p = 0.11). The rate of positive surgical margins was significantly higher with smaller prostates (20.2% vs. 17.8%). (Z = 2.52; p = 0.01). The incidence of biochemical recurrence was higher with smaller prostates (7.8% vs. 4.9%) (Z = 1.87; p = 0.06). Conclusion: Larger prostate size is associated with more blood loss and a higher rate of complications. However, the oncological outcome is better, compared to that in patients with smaller prostates. The impact of the size on the functional outcome is not clear.

Functional and Oncological Outcomes Following Robot-Assisted and Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy for Localized Prostate Cancer With a Large Prostate Volume: A Retrospective Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-Ups

Objective

We aimed to analyze the perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) for patients with localized prostate cancer (PCa) characterized by a large prostate volume (PV; ≥50 ml) over a minimum of 2 years follow-up.

Materials and Methods

Patients undergoing RARP and LRP for localized PCa with a large PV were included in the final analysis. The perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes were analyzed between the two groups.

Results

All operations were successfully completed without open conversion in both groups. The mean operative time and estimated blood loss in the RARP group were significantly decreased compared to those in the LRP group (139.4 vs. 159.0 min, p = 0.001, and 124.2 vs. 157.3 ml, p = 0.003, respectively). Patients in the RARP arm had significantly lower proportions of grade II or lower and of higher than grade II postoperative complications compared with those in the LRP group (7.9% vs. 17.1%, p = 0.033, and 1.6% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.047, respectively). No significant differences in terms of the rates of pT3 disease, positive surgical margin, and positive lymph node were noted between the two groups. Moreover, no significant difference in the median specimen Gleason score was observed between the RARP and LRP groups (6 vs. 7, p = 0.984). RARP vs. LRP resulted in higher proportions of urinary continence upon catheter removal (48.4% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.021) and at 3 (65.1% vs. 50.5%, p = 0.025) and 24 (90.5% vs. 81.0%, p = 0.037) months post-operation. The median erectile function scores at 6 and 24 months post-operation in the RARP arm were also significantly higher than those in the LRP arm (15 vs. 15, p = 0.042, and 15 vs. 13, p = 0.026, respectively). Kaplan–Meier analyses indicated that the biochemical recurrence-free survival and accumulative proportion of continence were statistically comparable between the two groups (p = 0.315 and p = 0.020, respectively).

Conclusions

For surgically managing localized PCa with a large prostate (≥50 ml), RARP had a tendency toward a lower risk of postoperative complications and better functional preservation without cancer control being compromised when compared to LRP.

What factors affect the operative time of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy?

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has gained prominence since the da Vinci surgical system was introduced in 2000. RARP has now become a standard procedure for treating cases with localized prostate cancer. However, no study has examined its surgical time by accurately measuring the pelvic visceral fat (PVF) volume. This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with prolonged console time and surgical difficulty by RARP surgeons.

METHODS

This study included 405 patients who underwent RARP between 2014 and 2019 at our institution. Given that the anatomical characteristics were considered to affect RARP, PVF and working space (WS) were estimated preoperatively by computed tomography using a 3D image analysis system. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the factors prolonging console time, such as body mass index (BMI), prostate volume, previous abdominal surgery, nerve-sparing procedure, PVF, and WS. We also investigated whether post-operative complications were associated with any of these factors.

RESULTS

Larger PVF (p = 0.028, odds ratio (OR) 1.43), smaller WS (p < 0.001, OR 2.48), and the nerve-sparing procedure (p = 0.037, OR 1.61) were statistically significant factors associated with prolonged console time. Furthermore, higher BMI (p = 0.013, OR 1.49) and smaller pelvic width (p < 0.001, OR 2.63) were the alternative and more practical factors associated with prolonged console time. The post-operative anastomotic leakage occurrence rate increased with the number of risk factors, while post-operative complications did not change even in high-risk cases.

CONCLUSION

PVF and WS are significant factors associated with prolonged console time in RARP cases. However, BMI can be as useful as PVF, since BMI significantly correlated with PVF. Additionally, pelvic width (PW) can be an alternative to WS, since PW correlated with WS. This study demonstrated that preoperative BMI and PW might predict the surgical risk and identify suitable RARP cases for novice surgeons.

Effect of prostate gland weight on the surgical and oncological outcomes of extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Background

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is performed by urologists as one of the surgical procedures for treating prostate cancer. Numerous studies have been published with regard to the impact of prostate weight on performing RARP but were limited by the insufficient number of patients and use of the transperitoneal approach. This study aimed to determine the effect of prostate gland weight on the surgical and short-term oncological outcomes of RARP using the extraperitoneal approach.

Methods

In total, 1168 patients who underwent extraperitoneal RARP (EP-RARP) performed by a single surgeon at Yonsei University Severance Hospital between May 2009 and May 2016 were included in the study. The patients were divided into 4 groups according to the prostate weight measured by transrectal ultrasonography preoperatively. Intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. One-way analysis of variance and the chi-square test were used in the statistical analyses.

Results

Age, the Gleason score, clinical stage, and pathological stage were significantly different. Patients with a larger prostate size had a longer console time and higher estimated blood loss (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences between the 4 groups in length of hospital stay, duration of catheterization, blood transfusion, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, history of abdominal surgery, intraoperative complications, positive surgical margin, incidence of lymphocele, and PSA recurrence after 1 year.

Conclusions

The console time and estimated blood loss were significantly increased with a larger prostate size. However, there were no significant differences in the oncologic outcome and intraoperative complications, suggesting that EP-RARP requires meticulous bleeding control in patients with a prostate weighing > 75 g, and if appropriate management is implemented for blood loss intraoperatively, EP-RARP can be performed regardless of the prostate size.

A new era of Asian urology: a SWOT analysis

Economic prosperity and increasing connectivity have made Asia an emerging centre of growth in health care, including in the field of urology. Large and varied patient populations, the availability of a trained workforce, the use of English as a common communication language, and overall low costs have contributed to this change. Rapid growth of regional urological associations and journals has fuelled the aspirations and abilities of Asian urologists to not only keep abreast of but often lead the change in urological disease management. Asian urology has immense potential to expand in areas in which it currently lags behind, the most important being research. The increasing ability to travel aids in developing networks for collaboration. However, Asian urologists will need to look at sustainable models of engagement and temper the need for short-term results if these opportunities are to reach their maximal potential.