Endoscopic Extraperitoneal Radical Prostatectomy: Evolution of the Technique and Experience with 2400 Cases

Incidence of Rectal Injury After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Context

Rectal injury (RI) is a dreaded complication after radical prostatectomy (RP), increasing the risk of early postoperative complications, such as bleeding and severe infection/sepsis, and late sequelae, such as a rectourethral fistula (RUF). Considering its traditionally low incidence, uncertainty remains as to predisposing risk factors and management.

Objective

To examine the incidence of RI after RP in contemporary series and to propose a pragmatic algorithm for its management.

Evidence acquisition

A systematic literature search was performed using the Medline and Scopus databases. Studies reporting data on RI incidence were selected. Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the differential incidence by age, surgical approach, salvage RP after radiation therapy, and previous benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related surgery.

Evidence synthesis

Eighty-eight, mostly retrospective noncomparative, studies were selected. The meta-analysis obtained a pooled RI incidence of 0.58% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.73) in contemporary series with significant across-study heterogeneity (I² = 100%, p < 0.00001). The highest RI incidence was found in patients undergoing open RP (1.25%; 95% CI 0.66-2.38) and laparoscopic RP (1.25%; 95% CI 0.75-2.08) followed by perineal RP (0.19%; 95% CI 0-276.95) and robotic RP (0.08%; 95% CI 0.02-0.31). Age ≥60 yr (0.56%; 95% CI 0.37-06) and salvage RP after radiation therapy (6.01%; 95% CI 3.99-9.05), but not previous BPH-related surgery (4.08%, 95% CI 0.92-18.20), were also associated with an increased RI incidence. Intraoperative versus postoperative RI detection was associated with a significantly decreased risk of severe postoperative complications (such as sepsis and bleeding) and subsequent formation of a RUF.

Conclusions

RI is a rare, but potentially devastating, complication following RP. RI incidence was higher in patients ≥60 yr of age, and in those who underwent open/laparoscopic approach or salvage RP after radiation therapy. Intraoperative RI detection and repair apparently constitute the single most critical step to significantly decrease the risk of major postoperative complications and subsequent RUF formation. Conversely, intraoperatively undetected RI can lead more often to severe infective complications and RUF, the management of which remains poorly standardised and requires complex procedures.

Patient summary

Accidental rectum tear is a rare, but potentially devastating, complication in men undergoing prostate removal for cancer. It occurs more often in patients aged 60 yr or older as well as in those who underwent prostate removal via an open/laparoscopic approach and/or prostate removal after radiation therapy for recurrent disease. Prompt identification and repair of this condition during the initial operation are the key to reduce further complications such as the formation of an abnormal opening between the rectum and the urinary tract.

A class of spatial remote center-of-motion mechanisms and its forward kinematics

Robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has shown tremendous advances over the traditional technique. A crucial challenge for developing a MIS robot is the kinematic design of the remote center-of-motion (RCM) mechanism. In this paper, a class of spatial RCM mechanism is analyzed. They are obtained by generating virtual parallelograms. The main process is to construct a line that passes through a fixed point under the mechanical constraint. The axis of the surgical tool is then constrained to parallel with that line. Hence, due to the geometrical feature of the parallel lines, the axis of the surgical tool will always pass through a fixed point, i.e., the RCM point. Due to the specially designed structure, the fixed point does not need to be physically belonging to the mechanism. The geometrical analysis method is employed to obtain the closed-form solution of the forward kinematics of the proposed mechanisms. Due to the high load capacity of parallel mechanism, the robots based on the proposed RCM mechanisms have promising applications as an external positioner to be used in robotic single-port surgeries.

Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy after radical resection of pT1-pT2 rectal cancer: a report of thirty cases

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) has gained popularity for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. However, prior complex lower abdominal or pelvic surgery can complicate subsequent EERPE. To date, there have been few reports on patients who underwent EERPE after radical resection of pT1-pT2 rectal cancer.

AIM

To present our experience with EERPE in patients after radical resection of pT1-pT2 rectal carcinoma and introduce a simple and effective way to create an extraperitoneal working space.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Thirty patients after radical resection of pT1-pT2 rectal carcinoma were treated with EERPE for biopsy-proven localized prostate cancer. Operation time, estimated blood loss, conversion to open surgery rate, transfusion rate and transurethral catheter time were recorded. Meanwhile, functional outcome (continence and potency) and oncological outcome were reviewed.

RESULTS

The average operative time was 168 min. Mean blood loss was 195 ml. There was no need for conversion to open surgery or transfusion. The catheter was removed on postoperative day (POD) 7.8. After a mean follow-up time of 53.1 months, 3 patients had a prostate-specific antigen level relapse over 0.1 ng/ml. At the follow-up time, 26 patients were completely continent, and 4 needed 1-2 pads/day. Of the 6 patients who underwent neurovascular bundle preservation, none have experienced return of erections at the last follow-up time.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy after radical resection of rectal carcinoma appears promising, with feasibility in experienced hands. The operative data, postoperative urinary incontinence and oncological outcomes appear encouraging, but the rate of erectile dysfunction seems to be disappointing.

[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.

Prevention and management of post prostatectomy erectile dysfunction

Sexual dysfunction is common in patients with prostate cancer (PC) following radical prostatectomy (RP). Review the available literature concerning prevention and management strategies for post-RP erectile function (EF) impairment in terms of preoperative patient characteristics, intra and postoperative factors that may influence EF recovery, and postoperative treatments for erectile dysfunction (ED). A literature search was performed using Google and PubMed database for English-language original and review articles, either published or e-published up to July 2013. The literature still demonstrates a great inconsistency in the definition of what is considered normal EF both before and after RP. Thus, using validated psychometric instruments with recognized cut-offs for normalcy and severity during the pre- and post-operative evaluation should be routinely considered. Therefore, a comprehensive discussion with the patient about the true prevalence of postoperative ED, the concept of spontaneous or pharmacologically-assisted erections, and the difference between “back to baseline” EF and “erections adequate enough to have successful intercourse” clearly emerge as key issues in the eventual understanding of post-RP ED prevention and promotion of satisfactory EF recovery. Patient factors (including age, baseline EF, comorbid conditions status), cancer selection (non- vs. uni- vs. bilateral nerve-sparing), type of surgery (i.e., intra vs. inter vs. extrafascial surgeries), surgical techniques (i.e., open, laparoscopic and robotically-assisted RP), and surgeon factors (i.e., surgical volume and surgical skill) represent the key significant contributors to EF recovery. A number of preclinical and clinical data show that rehabilitation and treatment in due time are undoubtedly better than leaving the erectile tissue to its unassisted postoperative fate. The role of postoperative ED treatment for those patients who received a non-nerve-sparing RP was also extensively discussed. Optimal outcomes are achieved mainly by the careful choice of the correct patient for the correct type of surgery. Despite a plethora of potential rehabilitative approaches, they should be only considered as “strategies”, since incontrovertible evidence of their effectiveness for improving natural EF recovery is limited. Conversely, numerous effective therapeutic options are available for treating post-RP ED.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure

Worldwide, prostate cancer (PCa) is the second most common malignancy in males. We undertook a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with a transperitoneal (TLRP) approach, versus that of an extraperitoneal (ELRP) approach, for treatment of localized PCa. A comprehensive literature search retrieved 14 publications, with a total of 1715 patients. Meta-analysis of these studies showed that an ELRP approach was associated with a significantly shorter postoperative catheterization time (MD: 1.99; 95% CI: 0.52 to 3.54; P = 0.008), less blood transfusion rate (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.06; P = 0.04), shorter intestinal function recovery time (MD: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.09; P < 0.0001) and shorter hospitalization days (MD: 2.71; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.39; P = 0.002). In addition, our results showed no statistically significant differences between the two groups in operation time (MD: 19.39; 95% CI: −6.67 to 45.44; P = 0.014), intraoperative blood loss (MD: 4.89; 95% CI: −105.00 to 114.79; P = 0.93) and total complication rate (RR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.74; P = 0.27). In summary, our meta-analysis showed that ELRP is likely to be a safe and feasible alternative for localized PCa patients compared with TLRP.

Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Alone or With Laparoscopic Herniorrhaphy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Prostate cancer and inguinal hernia are common health issues in men aged more than 50 years. Recently, more data are accumulating that laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair (LIHR) can be performed in the same operation. The purpose of this study was to compare patients who underwent simultaneous extraperitoneal LRP (E-LRP) and LIHR with control patients who underwent only E-LRP in a matched-pairs design.

METHODS

Medical records of 215 patients were evaluated, and 20 patients who underwent E-LRP+LIHR were compared with 40 patients who underwent only E-LRP in a matched-pairs analysis. Preoperative clinical parameters (age, body mass index, prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, Gleason score of the prostate biopsy, and prostate volume) and operative data (operation time, duration of catheterization, length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, time to perform the anastomosis and its quality, and the percentage of patients with bilateral lymphadenectomy) were evaluated, as well as postoperative parameters (pathological stage, Gleason score, specimen weight, follow-up duration, biochemical recurrence, complication rates, and duration of postoperative analgesic treatment).

RESULTS

No statistically significant differences were found in the preoperative and operative parameters between the 2 study groups. Pathological parameters and the follow-up period and complication rates were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Performing LIHR and E-LRP during the same operation is safe and feasible in the treatment of patients with prostate cancer and inguinal hernia.

Laparoscopic simple prostatectomy: A reasonable option for large prostatic adenomas

Aim of the Study:

In this work, surgical technique followed by two academic departments on laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP) of large prostatic adenomas is being described.

Materials and Methods:

The initial cumulative experience from 11 patients with lower urinary tract symptoms of benign prostatic hyperplasia origin subjected to LSP is being presented.

Results:

All cases had prostatic adenomas greater than 80 ml. Mean operation time was 99.5 min (values from 70 to 150 min) and mean blood loss was 205 ml (values from 100 to 300 ml). Blood transfusion was deemed necessary in one case. Bladder catheter was removed successfully on postoperative day 5 in all cases. No significant postoperative complication was noted. At a 3 months follow-up a significant decrease in International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) was evident in all patients (mean IPSS 27.7 vs. 15.3 preoperative vs. postoperative accordingly).

Conclusions:

According to our data and similarly to the rest of the LSP literature, laparoscopic excision of voluminous prostatic adenomas is a feasible and safe procedure. Nevertheless, further investigation including a larger number of patients and long-term follow-up is deemed necessary before making definite conclusions regarding the approach.

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy after previous transurethral resection of prostate using a catheter balloon inflated in prostatic urethra: Oncological and functional outcomes from a matched pair analysis

OBJECTIVES

To explore the surgical, oncological and functional outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients who have undergone transurethral resection of the prostate, using a catheter balloon inflated in the prostatic urethra.

METHODS

A total of 25 patients were randomly assigned to the no balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group (n = 12) and the with balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group (n = 13). Two matched pairs analyses were carried out to identify the 12 (control A) and 13 (control B) surgery-naïve patients. The outcomes were compared between the groups with previous transurethral resection of the prostate (no balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and with balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy groups) and the controls. The rate of intra- and postoperative complications was assessed. The International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form and the International Index of Erectile Function 5 were used for symptoms evaluation.

RESULTS

The mean blood loss was higher in patients submitted to transurethral resection of the prostate, with statistically insignificant reduced blood loss in the with balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group. The no balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group had longer operative time compared with both the with balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and control A groups (P < 0.05). International Index of Erectile Function 5 showed a significant difference between no balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and its control group; the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire showed a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) between the no balloon previous transurethral resection of the prostate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and control A groups.

CONCLUSION

The use of a catheter balloon inflated in the prostatic urethra seems to facilitate laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with previous transurethral resection of the prostate, ultimately reducing the rate of perioperative complications. These findings warrant further investigation on a larger case series with a longer follow up.

Kinematic Design of a Novel Spatial Remote Center-of-Motion Mechanism for Minimally Invasive Surgical Robot

To deliver more value to the healthcare industry, a specialized surgical robot is needed in the minimally invasive surgery (MIS) field. To fill this need, a compact hybrid robotic wrist with four degrees of freedom (DOFs) is developed for assisting physicians to perform MIS. The main body of the wrist is a 2DOF parallel mechanism with a remote center-of-motion (RCM), which is located outside the mechanism. From the mechanical point of view, it is different from existing 2DOF spherical mechanisms, since there is no physical constraint on the RCM. Other DOFs of the wrist are realized by a revolute joint and a prismatic joint, which are serially mounted on the movable platform of the parallel mechanism. The function of these DOFs is to realize the roll motion and the in-out translation of the surgical tool. Special attention is paid to the parallel RCM mechanism. The detailed design is provided and the kinematic equations are obtained in the paper. Further, the Jacobian matrix is derived based on the kinematic equations. Finally, the paper examines the singularity configurations and implements the condition number analysis to identify the kinematic performance of the mechanism.

A Critical Analysis of the Learning Curve and Postlearning Curve Outcomes of Two Experience- and Volume-Matched Surgeons for Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

There remains equipoise with regard to whether laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has any benefit over the other. Despite this, there is a trend for the increasing adoption of RARP at great cost to health services across the world. The aim was to critically analyze the learning curve and outcomes for LRP and RARP for two experience- and volume-matched surgeons who have completed the learning curve for LRP and RARP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two experience- and volume-matched LRP and RARP surgeons who have completed the learning curve were compared with respect to their learning curve and outcomes for RARP and LRP. There were 531 RARP and 550 LRPs analyzed from April 2003 until January 2012 at two relatively high-volume United Kingdom centers. Outcome measures included operative time, blood loss, complication rate (Clavien-Dindo grade III), positive surgical margin (PSM) rate, and early continence rate.

RESULTS

Learning curves for blood loss, operative times, and complication rate were similar between groups. The overall PSM rate and pT2 PSM rate learning curves were longer for RARP compared with LRP but shorter for early continence. Apical PSM showed no learning curve for RARP; however, a long learning curve for LRP and the rate was lower for RARP than for LRP (P=<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study of RARP and LRP identified that both modalities had long learning curves. Despite the long learning curve for RARP, significant benefits in lower PSM rates and better early continence in comparison with LRP exist. There are benefits to patients with RARP over LRP, especially those linked to better apical dissection (apical PSM and early continence).

Robotic and minimal access surgery: technology and surgical outcomes of radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer

Since the 1990s, minimal access surgery has been utilized in urology. In the past 15 years, robotic surgery has evolved and become a natural part of minimal access surgery. The dissemination has been fast and the opportunity of prospective trials has been missed. Nevertheless, robotic surgery has obvious benefits for the surgeon and patient. Even though the scientific evidence is not strong, robotic surgery is here to stay. However, there are lessons to learn from the implementation of the da Vinci system with regards to patient safety and prospective evaluation of the new technology. The future of surgery will include technologies derived from robotic surgery.

Posterior reconstruction and outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a high-risk setting

Posterior reconstruction was found to be associated with lower degree of anastomotic leakage and enhanced urinary continence at one and three months after extrafascial laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Background and Objectives:

To detail the technique and evaluate the impact of a personal modified posterior reconstruction technique (PDR) on the outcomes of extrafascial laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (eLRP) in a consecutive series of 52 patients affected by high-risk prostate cancer (HRPCa).

Methods:

From October 2007 to March 2012, 52 patients underwent PDR during eLRP for HRPCa. Fifty-four patients who underwent eLRP for HRPCa with no PDR were considered as historical controls. Mean operative time (MOT), mean catheterization time (MCT), % continence and quality of life (QoL) at a scheduled follow-up, % anastomotic leakage, % adjuvant therapy were compared between the groups. Percentage of continence and QoL were prospectively assessed by self-administered validated questionnaires (ICI-Q-SF; SF-36) at 1, 3, 6, and12 months.

Results:

PDR was associated wither higher continence rates at 1 and 3 mo (P = .028, P = .006), a lower incidence of cystographic leakage (P = .002), and an increased adjuvant radiotherapy rate (P = .008). At 1- and 3-mo interval, in the PDR group, we found a higher number of patients reporting better general health, (P = .01, P = .03) reduced role limitations due to physical health, (P = .02, P = .001), and emotional problems (P = .001, P = .02).

Conclusions:

PDR is associated with a lower degree of anastomotic leakage, and it significantly enhances urinary continence at 1 and 3 mo. The increased adjuvant radiotherapy rate and quality of life after surgery observed with our technique suggest that in the high-risk setting an early functional recovery may substantially influence the oncologic outcome of eLRP.

'Scarless' laparoscopic urologic surgery by the combination of mini-laparoscopic and laparoendoscopic single-site surgery equipment

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated reconstructive and oncological laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) combined with mini-laparoscopic instruments as standard equipment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

30 patients underwent reconstructive and oncological LESS: mini-laparoscopic-assisted LESS pyeloplasty (LESS-P, n = 18), mini-laparoscopic-assisted LESS partial nephrectomy (LESS-PN, n = 7) or mini-laparoscopic-assisted LESS radical prostatectomy (LESS-RP, n = 5). Perioperative data were prospectively collected.

RESULTS

The 18 LESS-P cases had operative times ranging between 120 and 180 min (average 147.9 min). Estimated blood loss ranged between 100 and 300 ml (average 202.1 ml). Two patients required additional management for failed reconstruction. LESS-PN was performed in 7 patients with tumor size ranging between 2.5 and 3.8 cm (average 2.7 cm). Average operative time and blood loss were 155 (140-180) min and 321.4 (250-550) ml, respectively. Renal artery clamping took place in 1 case. LESS-RP was performed in 5 patients; average operative time was 156 (140-180) min and average blood loss 196 (100-400) ml. Functional and oncological outcome was directly comparable to laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

CONCLUSION

The combination of LESS and mini-laparoscopic instrumentation as routine equipment of reconstructive LESS reveals a different perspective for 'scarless' urologic surgery.

Extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Initial experience

OBJECTIVES

To report our initial experience and technique of performing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) with the extraperitoneal approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven patients, between September 2010 to January 2012, were included in the study. All patients underwent extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Patients were placed supine with only 10-15(0) Trendelenburg tilt. The extraperitoneal space was developed behind the posterior rectus sheath. A five-port technique was used. After incision of endopelvic fascia and ligation of the deep venous complex, the rest of the procedure proceeded along the lines of the transperitoneal approach.

RESULTS

The mean patient age, prostate size and Gleason score were 67 ± 1.8 years, 45 ± 9.55 g and 6, respectively. The mean prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 6.50 ng/mL. The mean time required for creating extraperitoneal space, docking of robot and console time were 22, 7 and 94 min, respectively. The mean time to resume full oral feeds was 22 ± 3.45 h. There were no conversions from extraperitoneal to transperitoneal or open surgery in our series. Pathological stage was pT1, pT2a and pT3b in 11 (40.74%), 14 (51.85%) and two (7.4%) patients, respectively. Two patients had positive surgical margins and two had biochemical recurrence at the last follow-up. Our mean follow-up was 12 ± 3.30 (2-17) months. The overall continence rate was 83.33% and 92.4% at 6 and 12 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Extraperitoneal RALP is an efficacious, minimally invasive approach for patients with localized carcinoma of the prostate.

Analysis of the pentafecta learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) has a long learning curve; however, little is known about the pentafecta learning curve for LRP. We analysed the learning curve for a fellowship trained surgeon with regard to the pentafecta with up to 6-year follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed in 550 cases, by dividing these cases into 11 groups of 50 patients. Outcomes analysed were the following: (1) the pentafecta (complication rate, positive surgical margin (PSM) rate, continence, potency and biochemical recurrence); (2) operative time and blood loss; and (3) overall pentafecta attainment.

RESULTS

The mean complication rate for the entire series was 9 %; this plateaued after 150 cases. The overall PSM rate for the series was 23.5 %, 16.3 % for pT2 and 40.5 % for pT3. PSM plateaued after 200 cases. Excluding the first 100 cases, the overall PSM rate for pT2 was 10.9 % and 37.8 % for pT3. The continence rate stabilised after approximately 250 cases. The rate of male sling/artificial urinary sphincter plateaued after 200 cases. The potency learning curve continues to improve after 250 cases of nerve-sparing (ns) endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) as does the pentafecta learning curve which closely follows the pattern of the potency learning curve. The last group of nsEERPE achieved pentafecta in 63 %.

CONCLUSION

This study shows multiple learning curves: an initial for peri-operative outcomes, then stabilisation of oncologic outcomes and the final for stabilisation of functional outcomes. In this series over 250 cases were required to achieve the learning curve.

Five-year oncological outcomes of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) for prostate cancer: results from a medium-volume UK centre

OBJECTIVE

To determine the 5-year oncological outcomes of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) from a medium-volume centre, thereby providing much needed data on outcomes from the UK.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2006 to January 2012, 575 patients underwent EERPE for localized prostate cancer, performed by a single surgeon who had completed a modular training programme. Follow-up was as per local hospital policy and data were collected in our prospective database. A retrospective review of patient demographics, prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels, pathological T stages, Gleason scores, surgical margin status and biochemical recurrence (BCR) data was performed. BCR was defined as PSA >0.2 μg/L.

RESULTS

The mean (range) patient age was 62 (40.3-76.5) years and the mean (range) follow-up was 30 (12-72) months. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) operating time was 135 (120-170) min and the median (IQR) blood loss was 200 (100-250) mL. Of the 575 patients, 135 (23.5%) had positive surgical margins (PSMs). The PSM rate for pT2 disease was 66/406 patients (16.3%) and for pT3 disease it was 68/168 patients (40.5%). Overall BCR-free survival at 5-years was 81.5%. Multivariate Cox analysis showed that PSMs, Gleason score, D'Amico risk category and pT stage were independent predictors of BCR-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This assessment of the oncological results of EERPE, which included the surgical learning curve, shows that the adoption of EERPE after mentored fellowship training translates into mid-term oncological outcomes in line with those of retropubic/transperitoneal laparoscopic approaches and with large-volume centres worldwide which have pioneered laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The study shows that EERPE in a medium-volume second generation laparoscopic centre (that introduced EERPE after adequate training in pioneering centres) produces results with good 5-year oncological outcomes, similar to those of other major series, for patients in the UK.

Erectile Function Following Prostate Cancer Treatment: Factors Predicting Recovery

Prostate cancer represents the most common nonskin malignancy encountered in men, and the excellent long-term survival achieved in the majority of patients has allowed more attention to be given to the side effects associated with its treatment. Erectile function is one of the main concerns of patients when considering treatment options for prostate cancer. Not surprisingly, post-treatment sexual function is closely related to outcome satisfaction and has long-lasting effects on quality of life. Radical prostatectomy is currently the most commonly employed therapy for prostate cancer. Conflicting rates of erectile dysfunction have been reported after surgery, owing not only to different surgical techniques but also because of dissimilar patient populations and definitions. Providing accurate information to individual patients in regards to their chances of recuperating the ability to have intercourse after treatment is important not only because it allows patients to make informed decisions but also because it has the potential to reduce treatment dissatisfaction. This article mainly focuses on discussing predictors of erectile function after radical prostatectomy. Patient factors, surgical aspects, including comparisons between open, laparoscopic, and robotic approaches, and postoperative management issues that impact sexual outcomes are evaluated. Prediction models combining multiple factors are described. The definition and chronology of erectile function recovery and impact of sexual function on quality of life after surgery are also discussed. Teloken PE and Mulhall JP. Erectile function following prostate cancer treatment: Factors predicting recovery. Sex Med Rev 2013;1:91-103.

Prospective randomized study of radiofrequency versus ultrasound scalpels on functional outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Surgical treatment of patients with prostate cancer currently involves laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or robot-assisted LRP. Continence and nerve-sparing procedures in these techniques are supported by dissection and hemostatic surgical devices powered by different types of energy. The aim of this study was to assess recovery of continence and erectile function after laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy comparing two surgical devices for dissection and hemostasis-radiofrequency (RF) and ultrasound (US) scalpels.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 132 men with localized prostate cancer were prospectively enrolled and scheduled for extraperitoneal LRP. Patients were randomly assigned to the RF group (LigaSure; n=66) or the US group (UltraCision; n=66). Outcomes were measured by the self-administered questionnaires (International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence [ICIQ-UI] and International Index of Erectile Function 5 [IIEF 5]) 15 days before surgery, 90 and 180 days after prostatectomy to assess recovery of urinary continence and erectile function.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding operative time, intra- and perioperative complications, or time of hospital stay. At 180 days after surgery, patients in the RF-treated group showed better recovery in terms of continence and erectile function compared with patients in the US group (ICIQ-UI: p=0.0016; IIEF 5: p=0.0352).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the RF scalpel provided better functional outcomes compared with the US scalpel in patients undergoing extraperitoneal LRP. This might be attributed to the low contiguous damage of those tissues, which are not directly involved in dissection and hemostasis, achieved using the RF device.

Dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Objectives

To describe a novel dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and to evaluate its postoperative outcomes.

Methods

A total of 109 patients who underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon were evaluated, including 44 patients with dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, 20 patients with conventional intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and 45 patients with non-nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Functional outcomes were evaluated using a self-administered questionnaire (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite). Continence was defined as zero to one security pad per day. Oncological outcomes were evaluated based on positive surgical margin.

Results

In the dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group, the continence rate was 57%, 77% and 95% at 1, 3 and 12 months, respectively. The continence rate in the conventional intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group was 37%, 63% and 90%, and in the non-nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group it was 23%, 57% and 82% at 1, 3, and 12 months, respectively. The dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group showed a significantly earlier recovery from incontinence compared with that in the conventional intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and non-nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy groups (log–rank test, P = 0.044 and P < 0.001). Similarly, the dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group tended to show a more early recovery in relation to urinary function of the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite. Regarding sexual function, there were no significant differences between the dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and conventional intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy groups. In pT2 patients, the positive surgical margin rate of the dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy group (11%) was similar to that of the other two groups (conventional intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy 7%; non-nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy 11%).

Conclusions

The dorsal vein complex preserving technique for intrafascial nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy technique provides early recovery from incontinence without adversely affecting the oncological outcome.

Tissue engineering for the oncologic urinary bladder

Urinary diversion after radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer normally takes the form of an ileal conduit or neobladder. However, such diversions are associated with a number of complications including increased risk of infection. A plausible alternative is the construction of a neobladder (or bladder tissue) in vitro using autologous cells harvested from the patient. Biomaterials can be used as a scaffold for naturally occurring regenerative stem cells to latch onto to regrow the bladder smooth muscle and epithelium. Such engineered tissues show great promise in urologic tissue regeneration, but are faced with a number of challenges. For example, the differentiation mesenchymal stem cells from various sources can be difficult and the smooth muscle cells formed do not precisely mimic the natural cells.

Feasibility of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer patients with high prostate-specific antigen: feasibility and 1-year outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Urologists are cautious to offer minimally invasive radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer patients with high prostate-specific antigen (and therefore anticipated to have locally advanced or metastatic disease) because of concerns regarding lack of complete cure after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy and of worsening of continence if adjuvant radiotherapy is used.

METHODS

A retrospective review of our institutional database was carried out to identify patients with PSA ≥20 ng/mL who underwent minimally invasive radical prostatectomy between January 2002 and October 2010. Intraoperative, pathological, functional and short-term oncological outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 233 patients met study criteria and were included in the analysis. The median prostate-specific antigen and prostate size were 28.5 ng/mL and 47 mL, respectively. Intraoperative complications were the following: rectal injury (0.86%) and blood transfusion (1.7%). Early postoperative complications included prolonged (>6 days) catheterization (9.4%), hematoma (4.7%), deep venous thrombosis (0.86%) and lymphocele (5.1%). Late postoperative complications included cerebrovascular accident (0.4%) and anastomotic stricture (0.8%). Pathology revealed poorly differentiated cancer in 48.9%, pT3/pT4 disease in 55.8%, positive margins in 28.3% and lymph node disease in 20.2% of the cases. Adverse pathological findings were more frequent in patients with prostate-specific antigen >40 ng/mL and (or) in those with locally advanced disease (pT3/pT4). In 62.2% of the cases, adjuvant radiotherapy was used. At 1-year follow up, 80% of patients did not show evidence of biochemical recurrence and 98.8% of them had good recovery of continence.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy might represent a reasonable option in prostate cancer patients with high prostate-specific antigen as a part of a multimodality treatment approach.

Oncological and functional results of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

The oncological and functional results of 329 cases in a population treated with extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (ELRP) were evaluated retrospectively. A total of 329 inconsecutive patients with prostate cancer (PCa) who underwent ELRP were retrospectively analyzed. The median initial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level was 17.35 ng/ml. The median biopsy Gleason score was 7.77. Patients with a T2 or T3a clinical stage had received preoperative neoadjuvant hormonal therapy (NHT) for 3 to 9 months prior to ELRP. No conversion or re-intervention were observed. The median time for anastomosis, surgery time and postoperative catheterization time were 13.0 min, 90.0 min and 6 days, respectively. The median estimated blood loss was 75 ml. There were 12 temporary urinary leakages requiring prolonged catheterization to 14 days. There was 1 case of deep vein thrombosis, 1 case of alimentary tract hemorrhage and 7 cases of anterior urethral stricture. The median follow-up time was 27 months. A total of 17 patients were lost during the follow-up period. No rectal injury, lymphocele, incision hernia, postoperative persistent urinary leak or anastomotic stricture occurred. Younger patients (≤67 years of age) had a more rapid recovery of continence and a better postoperative potency. The overall positive surgical margin rate was 16.7%, which correlated with the pathological stage and Gleason score, respectively (both P<0.001). A total of 89 (28.6%) patients were diagnosed with biochemical recurrence. The initial PSA value, PSM, pathological stage and Gleason score were identified as independent prognostic factors for biochemical recurrence-free survival using multivariate analysis. Our results demonstrated that preoperative NHT had significant effects on the pathological Gleason score (P<0.001) and surgical margin (P=0.027), but no significant impact on biochemical recurrence (P=0.202). The reproducibility of ELRP has been proven as a reliable curative treatment in Western countries during the last 15 years. Due to the increase in PCa patients, the results of our study may aid surgeons who use ELRP for the first time.

Prevention and management of postprostatectomy sexual dysfunctions. Part 1: choosing the right patient at the right time for the right surgery

CONTEXT

Sexual dysfunction is common in patients following radical prostatectomy (RP) for prostate cancer (PCa).

OBJECTIVE

To review the available literature concerning prevention and management strategies for post-RP erectile function (EF) impairment in terms of preoperative patient characteristics and intra- and postoperative factors that may influence EF recovery.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was performed using Google and PubMed database for English-language original and review articles either published or e-published up to November 2011.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The literature demonstrates great inconsistency in what constitutes normal EF before surgery and what a man may consider a normal erection after RP. The use of validated psychometric instruments with recognised cut-offs for normalcy and severity during the pre- and postoperative evaluation should be routinely considered. Therefore, a comprehensive discussion with the patient about the true prevalence of postoperative erectile dysfunction (ED), the concept of spontaneous or pharmacologically assisted erections, and the difference between "back to baseline" EF and "erections adequate enough to have successful intercourse" clearly emerge as key issues in the eventual understanding of the prevention of ED and promotion of satisfactory EF recovery post-RP. Patient factors (including age, baseline EF, and status of comorbid conditions), cancer selection (unilateral vs bilateral nerve sparing), type of surgery (ie, intra- vs inter- vs extrafascial surgeries), surgical techniques (ie, open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted RP), and surgeon factors (ie, surgical volume and surgical skill) represent the key significant contributors to EF recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

The complexity of the issues discussed throughout this review culminates in the simple concept that optimal outcomes are achieved by the careful choice of the correct patient for the correct type of surgery.

[Radical prostatectomy - pro laparoscopic]

Recent publications have failed to demonstrate significant differences in perioperative oncological and functional outcomes between laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRPE) and R-LRPE. Reports suggesting better functional results, in particular better potency rates for R-LRPE, are rare. However, to date no large prospective, randomized, multicenter studies have compared the two methods. With an experienced operator both methods produce comparably good results. The monopoly of the intuitive system with extremely high cost of purchase and maintenance are the major disadvantages of R-LRPE.

Evolution of care pathway for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

We report results of the introduction of a laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) care pathway. This included the introduction of a transversus abdominis plane (TAP) local anesthetic block and other measures to reduce the impact of factors known to delay postoperative recovery. Outcomes including pain, analgesic requirements, complications, and length of stay are reported.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred consecutive patients undergoing LRP from 2008 to 2010 were prospectively studied. A detailed perioperative care pathway was developed and implemented. The pathway was modified after a pain audit to include bilateral transversus abdominis plane regional anesthetic blockade. Same day discharge criteria were applied to suitable patients. Demographics and perioperative and follow-up data were prospectively collected and recorded on a database.

RESULTS

Overall, 78% of cases were discharged after 1 night stay; 14 patients were managed as true day cases without overnight stay. Operative time (P<0.0001), intraoperative blood loss (P=0.018), %≤ 1 day stay (P=0.0091), transfusion, and conversion rate (nil in latter 100 cases) all improved significantly in the second 100 group of patients compared with the first 100 cases. The introduction of TAP blocks led to significant reductions of mean intraoperative and postoperative opiate use (17.3 mg to 1.3 mg and 1.9 mg to 0.2 mg morphine, respectively) without any significant effect on perceived pain. True day cases did not experience a significantly different rate of complications than the whole cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Through a structured care pathway incorporating the TAP block, 1 night stay laparoscopic prostatectomy can be safely delivered with reduced inpatient stay costs. In selected patients, day-case prostatectomy is feasible.

Evolution of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): technique and outcome

Endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE) is a well-established and standardized technique for treating patients with localized prostate cancer. Nevertheless, the procedure is continuously being refined with the expansion of anatomical knowledge. The development of a nerve-sparing approach and improvements in currently used equipment are expected to yield better results in cosmesis and convalescence without sacrificing the procedure's established benefits in terms of potency, continence and oncological management. In this study, the technique and its evolution are presented in detail, along with an analysis of its clinical efficacy. We also consult the literature to compare EERPE to transperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and we also discuss new technical advancements regarding the use of robotic assistance during EERPE.

Oncologic outcomes of asian men with clinically localized prostate cancer after extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single-institution experience

Purpose. To evaluate the midterm oncologic results of extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (EPLRP) for Asian men with localized prostate cancer. Methods. Between 2004 and 2009, 218 men underwent EPLRP at an Asian tertiary hospital. The mean preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was 15.5 ng/ml and mean Gleason score was 6.6. Stage distributions were cT1a-b in 21 cases, cT1c in 139, cT2 in 48 and cT3 in 10. Disease recurrence was defined as PSA ≥ 0.2 ng/mL in 2 consecutive measurements or initiation of secondary therapy. Results. Postoperative pathological stage was pT2a-b in 33 patients, pT2cN0 in 10, pT3a in 27, pT3b in 36, pT4 in 9 and pN1 in 10. Positive surgical margins occurred in 14.6% and 48.6% for pT2 and pT3 diseases, respectively (P < .001). The overall PSA recurrence-free survival at 3 and 5 years was 82.1% and 74.5%. By the pathological stages, 3-year recurrence-free survival was 92.4% (pT2), 81.1% (pT3a), 62.6% (pT3b-4) and 55.6% (pN1), respectively (P < .001). Conclusions. EPLRP is curative even for some locally advanced prostate cancers in a midterm follow-up. Even at an Asian center of low volume of radical prostatectomy EPLRP still provides oncologic outcomes similar to that of high volume centers.

Comments on the extraperitoneal approach for standard laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: what is gained and what is lost

Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (LERP) is considered the standard care treatment option for the management of localized and locally advanced prostatic cancer (PCa) in many institutes worldwide. In this work, the main advantages and disadvantages of LERP approach are reviewed with regard to its outcomes, the complication management, the learning curve, and the extend of pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND). It is concluded that LERP demonstrates comparable cancer control, urinary continence, and potency outcomes with the open and the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, while offering advantages in complication management in comparison to the transperitoneal approach. Learning curve of LERP is considered long and stiff and significantly affects perioperative outcomes and morbidity, cancer control, and functional results. Thus, close mentoring especially in the beginning of the learning curve is advised. Finally, LERP still has a role in the limited or modified PLND offered in intermediate risk PCa patients.

Influence of bladder neck suspension stitches on early continence after radical prostatectomy: a prospective randomized study of 180 patients

Several techniques have been introduced to improve early postoperative continence. In this study, we evaluated the impact of bladder neck (vesicourethral anastomosis) suspension on the outcome of extraperitoneal endoscopic radical prostatectomy (EERPE). In this research, a total of 180 patients underwent EERPE. Group 1 included patients who underwent nerve-sparing EERPE (nsEERPE) (n=45), and Group 2 included patients who underwent nsEERPE with bladder neck suspension (BNS, n=45). Groups 3 (n=45) and 4 (n=45) included patients who received EERPE and EERPE with BNS, respectively. Patients were randomly assigned to receive BNS with their nsEERPE or EERPE procedure. Perioperative parameters were recorded, and continence was evaluated by determining the number and weight of absorbent pads (pad weighing test) on the second day after catheter removal and by a questionnaire 3 months postoperatively. Two days after catheter removal, 11.1% of Group 1, 11.1% of Group 2, 4.4% of Group 3 and 8.9% of Group 4 were continent. The average urine loss was 80.4, 70.1, 325.0 and 291.3 g for the each of these groups, respectively. At 3 months, 76.5% of Group 1 and 81.3% of Group 2 were continent. The continence figures for Group 3 and 4 were 48.5% and 43.8%, respectively. Similar overall rates were observed in all groups. In conclusion, although there are controversial reports in the literature, early continence was never observed to be significantly higher in the BNS groups when compared with the non-BNS groups, regardless of the EERPE technique performed.

Effectiveness of postgraduate training for learning extraperitoneal access for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

To determine the effectiveness of postgraduate training for learning extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (EP-RARP) and to identify any unmet training needs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The training resources used were live surgery observations, digital video disc instruction, postgraduate courses, and literature review. Modifications to the transperitoneal (TP) setup in equipment, patient positioning, port placement, and access technique were identified. A surgeon who had previous experience with 898 TP robot-assisted radical prostatectomies (TP-RARPs) performed EP-RARP in 30 patients. We evaluated setup results, emphasizing access-related difficulties, and compared the EP cohort with a nonrandomized, concurrent TP cohort of 62 patients for short-term outcomes.

RESULTS

The median setup time for EP was 26 minutes (range 15-65 min) for EP compared with 14 to 17 minutes for the comparable TP setup and dropping the bladder. During EP setup and dissection, peritoneal entry occurred in 37%, incorrect port spacing in 10%, epigastric vessel injury in 10%, and other minor pitfalls in 10%. No significant differences were found between EP and TP in postsetup operative times, hospital stay, complications, surgical margin status with organ-confined disease, or lymph node dissection yield. EP had significantly higher estimated blood loss (300 vs 200 mL, P=0.001) and more symptomatic lymphoceles when extended pelvic lymph node dissection was performed (3/16 vs 0/47, P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Using postgraduate education resources, an experienced TP-RARP surgeon successfully transitioned to EP-RARP, achieving the major objectives of safety and equivalent outcomes. We identified several minor nuances in the setup that need further refinement in future education models.

Impact of Partin nomogram on presurgical planning: intrafascial versus interfascial nerve sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy

We studied the impact of using the Partin nomogram in tailoring the nerve sparing approach during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. From July 2008 to July 2009, 168 patients underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with bilateral nerves spared. All of the first 70 patients (cohort I) had intrafascial nerve sparing, while the Partin nomogram was used to determine the nerve sparing approach in the next 98 patients (cohort II). In patients with a probability greater than 53% of having pathologically non-organ-confined disease, conventional interfascial nerve sparing was performed; otherwise, intrafascial nerve sparing was carried out. Preoperative patient demographics were similar between the two cohorts. In cohort II, 68 and 30 patients had the bilateral nerves spared intrafascially and interfascially, respectively. Overall, the prevalence of pT3 disease in cohort I was 24.3% and in cohort II was 21.4%. The positive surgical margin rate in cohort I was 15.7% while that in cohort II was 6.1%. There was no significant difference in positive surgical margin rate in organ-confined (pT2) disease between the two groups (7.5 and 5.2%). On the other hand, pT3 positive surgical margin rate was significantly reduced in cohort II (41.2 and 4.8%, P = 0.013). Using the Partin nomogram in deciding interfascial versus intrafascial nerve sparing during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy gave a significant reduction of positive surgical margin rate in pT3 prostate cancers.

Bilateral vs unilateral laparoscopic intrafascial nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: evaluation of surgical and functional outcomes in 457 patients

Study Type - Therapy (case series).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

 4. What's known on the subject? and What does the study add? Bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy still represents an issue for urologists as the indications to perform it depend oft from the personal clinical experience. Moreover, until now data concerning bilateral and unilateral laparoscopic nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy have been limited. This study states that bilateral laparoscopic intrafascial nerve-sparing technique results in superior functional outcomes when compared with unilateral nsLRP and it suggests to prefer a bilateral nerve-sparing technique in younger patients with low-risk, organ-confined prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the surgical and functional outcomes in bilateral and unilateral nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (nsLRP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 2005 and May 2009, 457 nsLRP were performed at our clinic. In all, 250 patients underwent a bilateral nsLRP and 207 patients underwent an unilateral nsLRP. One surgeon performed all the operations. All patients presented at biopsy a localized prostate cancer. Demographic data and perioperative and postoperative measurements and outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

The operative times for bilateral nsLRP and unilateral nsLRP were 165 ± 45 min and 130 ± 25 min, respectively. The mean intra-operative blood loss was 450 ± 300 mL and 270 ± 160 mL in the bilateral and unilateral nsLRP groups with a transfusion rate of 3% and 1%, respectively (P = 0.013). Conversion to open surgery was never deemed necessary. Postoperatively, the mean Gleason Score after nsLRP and distribution of tumour stages was similar in the two groups, and the frequency of positive margins in both groups did not present any statistically significant difference. At 12 months, a complete continence was reported in 97% of patients who underwent a bilateral nsLRP and in 88% of patients of the unilateral nsLRP group. At that time, 69% in the bilateral nsLRP and 43% in the unilateral nsLRP groups reported the ability to engage in sexual intercourse.

CONCLUSION

The bilateral laparoscopic intrafascial nerve-sparing technique results in superior functional outcomes with regard to urinary continence and sexual potency, when compared with unilateral nsLRP, reporting similar oncological outcomes.

Comparison of the FreeHand® robotic camera holder with human assistants during endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVE

• To assess, in a prospective randomized study, the efficiency of the FreeHand® (Prosurgics Ltd, Bracknell, UK) compared to manual camera control during the performance of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• Three surgeons performed 50 EERPE for localized prostate cancer. In group A (n= 25), procedures were performed with manual control of the camera by the assistant, whereas group B (n= 25) patients were treated with the assistance of the FreeHand® robotic device. • The EERPE procedure was divided into several steps. • Total operation duration, time for each surgical step, number of camera movements, number of movement errors, number of times the lens was cleaned, blood loss and margin status were compared.

RESULTS

• No statistically significant difference was observed in terms of patient age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen level, Gleason score, positive cores and prostate volume. • The average operation duration required for the performance of each step did not differ significantly between the two groups. • Significant differences in favour of the FreeHand® camera holder were observed in case of horizontal and zooming camera movement, camera cleaning and camera errors. • Vertical camera movements were performed significantly faster by the human assistant compared to the robotic camera holder. • The average total operation duration was similar for both groups. • Positive surgical margins were detected in one patient in each group (4% of the patients).

CONCLUSIONS

• A comparison of the FreeHand® robotic camera holder with human camera control during EERPE showed a similar time requirement for the performance of each step of the procedure. • The robotic system provided accurate and fast movements of the camera without compromising the outcome of the procedure.