The "Natural History" of Evidence on Radical Prostatectomy: What Have 20 Years of Robots Given Us?

Continence criteria of 193 618 patients after open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES

To apply a new evidence-gathering methodology, called reverse systematic review (RSR), to analyse the influence of different continence classification criteria on urinary continence rates among open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic RP (LRP) and robot-assisted RP (RARP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search was carried out in eight databases between 2000 and 2020 through systematic reviews (SRs) studies referring to RRP, LRP or RARP (80 SRs). All references used in these SRs were captured referring to 910 papers in an overall database called the 'EVIDENCE Database'. A total of 422 studies related to post-RP urinary continence were selected for the final analysis, totalling 782 reports referring to 193 618 patients.

RESULTS

Overall, 206 (26.4%) reports for RRP, 243 (31.0%) reports for LRP, and 333 (42.6%) reports for RARP were found. Mean overall continence rates, respectively for RRP, LRP and RARP, were: 42%, 34% and 42% at 1 month; 62%, 64% and 65% at 3 months; 73, 77 and 79% at 6 months; and 81%, 85% and 86% at 12 months. The most used criterion was 'No pad' (53.3%), followed by 'Safety pad' (19.3%), 'Not described' (10.6%), and 'No leak' (9.9%). 'No pad' showed the lowest discrepancy in continence rates in each period compared to the overall average for each technique, demonstrating less ability to influence the final results favouring any of the techniques.

CONCLUSION

The RSR demonstrated that the 'No pad' criterion was the most used in the literature and showed the lowest bias capable of influencing the results and favouring any of the techniques and is the fairest option for future comparisons.

Erectile dysfunction criteria of 131,350 patients after open, laparoscopic, and robotic radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

Comparing post-radical prostatectomy erectile function rates among different techniques has always been a challenge in urology. This difficulty is due to the heterogeneity of studies, mainly in relation to the type of erectile function classification criteria used. The aim is to apply a new evidence-gathering methodology, called reverse systematic review, to compare erectile function rates among retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, considering the diversity of classification criteria.

METHODS

A search was carried out in eight databases between 2000 and 2020 through systematic review studies referring to retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (80 systematic reviews). All references used in these systematic reviews were captured by referring to 910 papers in a global database called EVIDENCE. A total of 268 studies related to post-prostatectomy erectile function rates were selected for the final analysis, totaling 465 cohorts or reports referring to 131,350 patients.

RESULTS

Note that, 119 (25.6%) reports for retropubic radical prostatectomy, 143 (30.7%) reports for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and 203 (43.7%) reports for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy were found. Mean overall erectile function rates, respectively for retropubic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, were: 16%, 12%, and 35% at 1 month, 22%, 26%, and 42% in 3 months; 30%, 44%, and 54% at 6 months, 41%, 55%, and 59% at 12 months, and 58%, 52%, and 67% at more than 18 months. The most used erectile function criterion was Erection Sufficient for Intercourse (74.1%), followed by Sexual Health Inventory for Men > 21 (5.5%), and Sexual Health Inventory for Men > 16 (3.7%). Erection Sufficient for Intercourse showed the lowest discrepancy in erectile function rates in each period compared to the global average, for each technique, demonstrating less ability to influence the final results, favoring any of the techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

The reverse systematic review demonstrated that the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy showed higher rates of erectile function recovery at all times analyzed (1->18 months), in relation to the retropubic radical prostatectomy and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The Erection Sufficient for Intercourse criterion was the most used in the literature and showed the lowest bias capable of influencing the results and favoring any of the techniques and might be the fairest option for future comparisons.

Radical Prostatectomy Technique Dispute: Analyzing Over 1.35 Million Surgeries in 20 Years of History

Systematic reviews (SR) produce the best evidence comparing open (RRP), laparoscopic (LRP), and robotic (RARP) radical prostatectomy (RP). However, the hyperfiltration of evidence generates very specific scenarios that reduce the power of extrapolation. To compare RP evidence regarding demographics using a new methodology called reverse systematic review (RSR). Between 2000 and 2020, 8 databases were searched for SR studies on RRP, LRP, or RARP. All references were captured and analyzed over time in 80 SR. Total of 1724 reports (nr = 752, 43.7% for RARP; nr = 559, 32.4% for RRP; nr = 413, 23.9% for LRP) described 1,353,485 patients (881,719, 65.1% RRP; 366,006, 27.0% RARP; 105,760, 7.8% LRP). Patients/center/year was higher in RARP compared to LRP and RRP, median 50.0, 40.0, and 36.66, respectively, P < .001. Surgeons per study was lesser in RARP and LRP compared to RRP, median 2.0, 2.0, and 6.0, respectively, P < .001. Study duration and follow-up in years was shorter in RARP compared to LRP and RRP, median 2.6, 3.0, and 4.0, respectively, P < .001. Cumulative RARP reports predominate in North America (55.7%, nr = 468) and Asia (47.8%, nr =129), while LRP predominate in Europe (42.3%, nr =230) and RRP in Oceania (45.1%, nr = 23). After 2010 all continents began to accumulate more patients in the robotic approach. Potential biases related to shorter follow-up, greater volume centers, and surgeons were identified favoring the RARP. Analyzing the context of the available evidence is essential to compare techniques. Influenced by economic and scientific interests, robotic surgery was developed in centers with a higher volume of surgeries, characterizing potential biases when comparing techniques in the clinical shared decision.

Surgical Results and Complications for Open, Laparoscopic, and Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Reverse Systematic Review

Context

The advantages of minimally invasive surgery for radical prostatectomy (RP) have been demonstrated in a number of systematic reviews (SRs). However, the rigorous study selection process for SR means that a lot of information can be excluded, leading to a very specific clinical scenario that is often unrepresentative of real life. Our new reverse SR methodology generates a heterogeneous population database that covers a wide range of clinical scenarios.

Objective

To compare perioperative surgical results and complications for open retropubic RP (RRP), laparoscopic RP (LRP), and robot-assisted RP (RARP) in a reverse SR.

Evidence acquisition

Eight databases were searched for SRs on RRP, LRP, or RARP between 2000 and 2020 (80 SRs). All references used in these SRs were captured for analysis (1724 articles). Perioperative outcomes and complications were compared among the RRP, LRP, and RARP approaches.

Evidence synthesis

We identified 559 (32.4%) reports on RRP, 413 (23.9%) on LRP, and 752 (43.7%) on RARP, involving 1 353 485 patients overall. RARP showed a significantly higher annual volume of surgery per surgeon (AVSS) in comparison to RRP and LRP (mean 64.29, 43.26, and 41.47, respectively), a higher percentage of low-risk patients (prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/ml, Gleason <7, stage <cT2), and a lower rate of lymphadenectomy, culminating in a lower complication rate (12.3% for RARP, 16.3% for LRP, 20.2% for RRP). Among all outcomes, only AVSS was significantly correlated with complication rates. An AVSS of 30, 95 and 95 surgeries/yr was required for RARP, LRP, and RRP, respectively, to obtain a complication rate of 12.3% (average for RARP). RARP showed better performance for all perioperative variables studied except for operative time (operative time: 199.8 vs 214.9 vs 169.5 min; estimated blood loss: 228.2 vs 408.0 vs 852.1 ml; blood transfusion rate: 2.8% vs 6.5% vs 19.8%; length of stay: 2.9 vs 5.7 vs 6.1 d; catheter time: 7.8 vs 8.5 vs 11.0 d for RARP vs LRP vs RRP).

Conclusions

Our reverse SR involved a wide real-life representative sample and reference values established in the literature and revealed that minimally invasive surgery had the best perioperative and complication results, especially RARP, which was associated with less complex cases, higher annual surgeon volume, and greater performance.

Patient summary

We used a wide sample representative of real-life surgical practice and reference values established in the literature for three techniques for removal of the prostate to guide patients and physicians in deciding the best surgical treatment for prostate cancer according to availability.