Transient renal dysfunction due to rhabdomyolysis after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

Efficacy of the opened legs position for protecting against postoperative rhabdomyolysis after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A propensity score-matched analysis of perioperative outcomes

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to clarify the relationships of intraoperative surgical position with the incidence of postoperative rhabdomyolysis and with postoperative renal function to safely perform robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

The participants in the present study were 276 consecutive patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy at our institutions between 2013 and 2020; 130 cases were performed in the opened legs position and 146 cases in the lithotomy position with a steep 23°-25° head-down position. Rhabdomyolysis was defined as creatine kinase values greater than 1000 IU/L. Propensity score matching including age, body mass index, the presence of comorbidities, preoperative creatine kinase, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, and prostate-specific antigen was performed, resulting in a matched cohort of 146 patients (opened legs position group n = 73; lithotomy position group n = 73).

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, creatine kinase values on the first day after surgery were significantly lower in the opened legs position group than in the lithotomy position group (opened legs position group: lithotomy position group = 246.9 ± 114.9 IU/L: 558.2 ± 114.9 IU/L, P = 0.034). There were significantly fewer patients diagnosed with postoperative rhabdomyolysis in the opened legs position group (opened legs position group: lithotomy position group = 0% (0/73): 9.6% (7/73), P < 0.001). In addition, fluid replacement volume was significantly less in the opened legs position group (opened legs position group: lithotomy position group = 5747 ± 180 mL: 6349 ± 0176 mL, P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

To prevent rhabdomyolysis after surgery, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy should be performed in the opened legs position.

Robotic radical perineal prostatectomy: tradition and evolution in the robotic era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an updated review of robotic radical perineal prostatectomy (r-RPP) with emphasis on the recent advances in terms of surgical technique, outcomes, and new robotic platforms.

RECENT FINDING

The technological innovations in the urological field have been applied to radical prostatectomy with the aim of preserving important anatomical structures and reduce patients' morbidity and mortality. In recent years, robotic surgery contributed to resurge radical perineal prostatectomy. In 2014, the Cleveland Clinic group was the first to demonstrate the utility of a robotic approach in RPP. To date, the majority of the reported studies showed that r-RPP has noninferior perioperative, short-term oncological, and functional outcomes compared with the traditional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Given these benefits, r-RPP is a promising approach in selected patients, such as obese ones. Moreover, robotic perineal pelvic lymph node dissection performed through the same incision of r-RPP and the new Single-Port (SP) Robotic System represent further steps towards the overcoming of some intrinsic limitation of this surgical approach making this technique suitable for a larger number of patients with prostatic cancer.

SUMMARY

Overall, r-RPP represents a reliable and effective novel surgical technique. However, more studies with long-term follow-up are needed to clarify the advantages over RARP.