[A prospective trial comparing consecutive series of open retropubic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a centre: Oncologic and functional outcomes]

Assessment of oncological and functional outcomes of retropubic radical prostatectomy: An academic center experience

PURPOSE

To report perioperative, pathological, oncological and functional outcomes of a contemporary series of retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), performed by one experienced surgeon.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a prospectively gathered database of consecutive patients who were treated by an RRP as first-line treatment for localized prostate cancer, from January 2014 to December 2019, in a single French academic center.

RESULTS

Overall, 364 patients were included. Median age and PSA were 65.7 years and 8.0ng/mL. According to D'Amico risk classification, 13.7% patients had a low-risk prostate cancer, 41.5% a favorable intermediate-risk, 23.4% an unfavorable intermediate-risk and 21.4% a high-risk prostate cancer. The rates of pT2 and pT3 were 48.6% (n=177) and 51.4% (n=187), respectively. The rates of non-nerve sparing surgery (NSS), unilateral NSS and bilateral NSS were 19.5% (n=71), 32.7% (n=119) and 47.8% (n=174). Total positive surgical margin (PSM) rate was 12.6% (n=46). Total pT2 PSM and pT3 PSM rates were 0.6% (n=1) and 24.1% (n=45) and achieved a statistical difference (P<0.001). At a median follow-up of 1.9-year, biochemical recurrence (BCR) occurred in 47 (12,9%) patients. Extracapsular extension was associated with a poor BCR-free survival as compared to organ confined disease (P<0.0001). At 2.7 years of follow-up, urinary continence rate was 88% (322/364). After exclusion of non-NSS RRP and non-interpretable questionnaires (score 1-4), median IIEF-5 score was 16 (8-20).

CONCLUSION

Retropubic radical prostatectomy ensures optimal pathological and functional results, in a current predominantly population of intermediate-risk prostate cancer and high-risk prostate cancer.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Facility-level analysis of robot utilization across disciplines in the National Cancer Database

To evaluate trends in contemporary robotic surgery across multiple organ sites as they relate to robotic prostatectomy volume. We queried the National Cancer Database for patients who underwent surgery from 2010 to 2013 for prostate, kidney, bladder, corpus uteri, uterus, cervix, colon, sigmoid, rectum, lung and bronchus. The trend between volumes of robotic surgery for each organ site was analyzed using the Cochran-Armitage test. Multivariable models were then created to determine independent predictors of robotic surgery within each organ site by calculating the odds ratio with 95% CI. Among the 566,399 surgical cases analyzed, 35.1% were performed using robot assistance. Institutions whose robotic prostatectomy volume was in the top 75 percentile compared to the bottom 25 percentile performed a larger percentage of robotic surgery on the following sites: kidney 32.6 vs. 28.8%, bladder 23.6 vs. 18.6%, uterus 52.5 vs. 47.7%, cervix 43.5 vs. 39.2%, colon 3.2 vs. 2.9%, rectum 10.7 vs. 8.9%, and lung 7.3 vs. 6.8% (all p < 0.0001). It appears that increased trends toward robotic surgery in urology have lead to increased robotic utilization within other surgical fields. Future analysis in benign utilizations of robotic surgery as well as outcome data comparing robotic to open approaches are needed to better understand the ever-evolving nature of minimally invasive surgery within the United States.

Neuro-anatomic basis of potency recovery after radical prostatectomy: an expert's point of view

INTRODUCTION

From 25% to 95% of those who have undergone radical prostatectomy (RP) report erectile dysfunction 12 months after surgery. We attempt a review of the available evidence regarding the anatomy of the cavernous nerves and the surgical refinements to enhance sexual function recovery after surgery.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The PubMed/Medline database was searched. Duplicates were removed. Studies were selected by the authors according to the aim of the present review.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The cavernous nerves are deemed responsible for erections, but their exact function is still a matter of debate. They do not necessarily have the same distribution in all individuals: in most the cases, these nerves are located posterolaterally, however, it is not uncommon to find some fibers on the anterolateral aspects of the prostate, especially towards the apex. Several technical strategies were proposed in order to intraoperatively identify and spare the neurovascular bundles: despite all efforts, clinical results are still only partially satisfying.

CONCLUSIONS

The recovery of potency is one of the most unpredictable outcomes after RP. The advent of the robotic surgical system seems to have brought a trend towards a faster recovery of erectile function.

Prostatectomies for localized prostate cancer: a mixed comparison network and cumulative meta-analysis

No consensus has been attained regarding the utility of open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) for localized prostate cancer (PCa). We carried out a network meta-analysis and cumulative meta-analysis comparing RRP, LRP and RALRP on peri-operative and functional outcome measures. Electronic databases were searched for either randomized clinical trials or cohort studies comparing RALRP either with LRP or RRP in patients with localized PCa. Outcome measures were as follows: overall, pT2 and pT3-positive surgical margins (PSMs); biochemical recurrence (BCR); complication rates; estimated blood loss; blood transfusion rate; continence and potency rates; duration of catheterization and hospital stay. Publication bias, risk of bias and inconsistency were assessed. Inverse heterogeneity model was used for analysis. A total of 45 studies were included for the final analysis. We observed that RALRP and LRP did not differ significantly from RRP with regard to the following outcomes: overall PSM; pT2 and pT3 PSMs; OT; complication rate; continence and potency rates; total blood loss and hospital stay. Duration of catheterization was significantly shorter in RALRP than LRP and RRP while significant reductions in the need for blood transfusion and BCR were observed for both RALRP and LRP in comparison with RRP. To conclude, similar functional, operative and oncologic outcomes were observed for both RALRP and LRP compared to RRP.

[Interest of surgical companionship during the training period of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy]

OBJECTIVE

Study of the learning curve of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, evaluating intraoperative difficulties and postoperative complications according to Clavien-Dindo classification.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective study of our first 157 consecutive patients treated with robot-assisted prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer between September 2011 and December 2014. Comparison of learning for each group of 50 procedures and then comparison between patients operated on by a pair of two seniors specially trained for robotic surgery and patients operated on by one mixed pair including a surgeon junior coached by one senior of the first group.

RESULTS

Only postoperative complications decreased significantly from the 51st patient (P=0.04). The curves showing the evolution of the operative time decreased with a parallel trend between the two pairs, but with more variability in the mixed pair. There was no significant difference in terms of intraoperative difficulties (P=0.59), nor postoperative complications (P=0.56) mainly of grade 2. The blood loss, transfusion rate, duration of hospitalization and readmission rates did not differ. Lymph node dissection did not affect outcomes. For oncological results, the overall rate of positive surgical margins (R+) was 30.6 % in the initial pair against 24.2 % in the mixed group with no significant difference. Nevertheless, the subpopulation study objectified a R+ rate of 12.86 % for pT2 against 42.85 % for pT3.

CONCLUSION

The early involvement of a junior surgeon who did not receive specific training, but benefiting from the guidance of a senior surgeon, did not compromise the results while allowing a faster learning curve with a rate of operative complications close to the one observed by the senior pair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4.

[Functional results and treatment of functional dysfunctions after radical prostatectomy]

OBJECTIVE

To describe the functional results and treatment of functional dysfunctions after radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Bibliography search was performed from the database Medline (National Library of Medicine, Pubmed) selected according to the scientific relevance. The research was focused on continence, potency, les dyserections, couple sexuality, incontinence, treatments of postoperative incontinence, dysrection and trifecta.

RESULTS

Radical prostatectomy is an elaborate and challenging procedure when carcinological risk balances with functional results. Despite recent developments in surgical techniques, post-radical prostatectomy urinary incontinence (pRP-UI) continues to be one of the most devastating complications, which affects 9-16% of patients. Sphincter injury and bladder dysfunction are the most common causes or pRP-UI. The assessment of severity of pRP-UI that affects the choice of treatment is still not well standardized but should include at least a pad test and self-administered questionnaires. The implantation of an artificial urinary sphincter AMS800 remains the gold standard treatment for patients with moderate to severe pRP-UI. The development of less invasive techniques such as the male sling of Pro-ACT balloons has provided alternative therapeutic options for moderate and slight forms of pRP-UI. Most groups now consider the bulbo-urethral compressive sling as the treatment of choice for patients with non-severe pRP-UI. The most appropriate second-line therapeutic strategy is not clearly determined. Recent therapies such as adjustable artificial urinary sphincters and sling and stem cells injections have been investigated. Maintenance of a satisfying sex life is a major concern of a majority of men facing prostate cancer and its treatments. It is essential to assess the couple's sexuality before treating prostate cancer in order to deliver comprehensive information and consider early therapeutic solutions adapted to the couple's expectations. Active pharmacological erectile rehabilitation (intracavernous injections or phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors [PDE5i] on demand, during in the month following surgery) or passive (daily PDE5i after surgery) might improve the quality of erections especially in response to PDE5i. Unimpaired aspects of sexual response (orgasm) may, when the erection is not yet recovered, represent an alternative allowing the couple to preserve intimacy and complicity. Androgen blockade is a major barrier to maintain or return to a satisfying sex. Trifecta is a simple tool to present in one way the results of radical prostatectomy: in case of bilateral neurovascular preservation, Trifecta is 60% whatever the surgical approach.

CONCLUSION

Radical prostatectomy is an elaborate and challenging procedure when carcinological risk balances with functional results. Various treatments of postoperative incontinence and dysrections exist. Functional disorders after surgery have to be treated to ameliorate quality of life of patients.

[Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: Contribution of robotic support, functional and oncological outcomes]

OBJECTIVES

Radical prostatectomy (RP) remains a standard for localized prostate cancer treatment. The objective of this study is to present this operating technique of the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (PR-RA) and to evaluate oncological and functional results as well as on the surgical safety.

METHODS

A first series of 1679 patients consecutively operated in our institution with this technique from 2005 to 2010 and with a 5-year follow-up evaluated in 2014. The oncology monitoring is ensured with a PSA test every six months during the first three years and once a year the years after if the level remains undetectable.

RESULTS

The oncologic outcomes show 17.4% for pT2 stages and 36.9% for pT3 stages positive margins. The level of biological recurrence is 21.27% with an average delay of 88 months as the time needed for the recurrence to occur. At 12 months, urinary continence (0-1pad/day) returned at 94% of all patients and potency with successful penetration for all men is 61.1% and 88.8% for men with sexual activity before surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The technique PRRA seems to be a reliable technique whose functional results studied from meta-analysis seem to be superior in terms of rapidity of recovery of the continence and erection in comparison with classical surgical or laparoscopic approach.

[Oncological outcomes of prostate cancer surgery]

OBJECTIVE

Review of the oncological results of the radical prostatectomy as initial treatment of prostate cancer, according to the surgical approach and the risk stratification using D'Amico risk groups.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Review of literature using Medline databases and MedScience based on scientific relevance. Research focused on the oncological results of the radical prostatectomy in series and meta-analysis published since 10 years, taking into consideration the surgical approach if mentioned.

RESULTS

The characteristics of the operated tumor highly impact the local control authenticated by the pathologic stage and the rates of positive surgical margins (PSM), in addition to the survival and the biochemical recurrence. Surgical technique adapted according to the tumor treated, was a constant challenge to the urologist, who counter balance between the oncological control and the conservation of urinary and sexual function by conditioning the type of radical prostatectomy. Results of radical prostatectomy acceptable in terms of PSM and survival are not influenced by the surgical approach but by the degree of surgical experience.

CONCLUSION

Results of radical prostatectomy show the efficient local control of prostate cancer, taking into consideration the oncological rules and indications validated by multidisciplinary meetings, based on the national (CCAFU) and European oncological guidelines. Tendency is going toward considering radical prostatectomy indicated for patients with higher risk of disease progression, so integrating surgery in a multidisciplinary personalized approach.