Avoiding disruption of timely surgical management of genitourinary cancers during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

Predictors of biochemical recurrence after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: single-centre analysis

Introduction

We evaluated risk factors for biochemical recurrence (BCR) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) based on our department database.

Material and methods

Patients who underwent RARP between 2018 and 2020 were identified and included in our retrospective study. Patients who received neoadjuvant treatment, patients with positive lymph nodes, salvage prostatectomies, and patients with missing data were excluded. BCR was defined as PSA ≥0.2 ng/ml. Parameters that were investigated were the International Society of Urological Pathologists (ISUP) score, stage, and positive surgical margins (PSM) as they were reported in the pathology report. A subgroup analysis based on the tumour stage was performed.

Results

A total of 414 patients were included in the analysis. Seventy-seven of them experienced BCR. Based on multivariable analysis, ISUP grade was a strong predictor for BCR with odds ratio (OR): 2.86 (CI: 1.49-5.65; p = 0.002), OR: 5.90 (CI: 1.81-18.6; p = 0.003), OR: 4.63 (CI: 1.79-11.9; p = 0.001) for ISUP grade 3, 4, 5, respectively. Regarding tumour stage, pT2 and pT3a did not show any significant difference in predicting BCR (p = 0.11), whereas pT3b stage was a predictor for BCR with OR: 6.2 (CI: 2.25-17.7; p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis for 206 patients with pT2 disease, ISUP group and PSM were predictors for BCR. On the other hand, when patients with pT3 disease were inspected, the only parameter that was predictive of BCR was pT3b disease (OR: 4.68, CI: 1.71-13.6; p = 0.003). ISUP grade, the extent of T3 disease, and the extent and ISUP grade of surgical margins were not predictors of BCR.

Conclusions

The most important risk factors for BCR after RARP are ISUP grade and tumour stage. In pT2 disease, PSM is a significant predictor of BCR, along with high ISUP grade. The substage pT3b can be considered a predictor of BCR in pT3 cases.

Intermediate-term oncological and functional outcomes in prostate cancer patients treated with perineal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A single center analysis

Objective

In the last 10 years, robotic platforms allowed to resume of some alternative surgical approaches, including perineal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (p-RARP). Herein, we present in detail the oncological and functional outcomes of patients who underwent p-RARP with a median follow-up of 30 months.

Methods

Patients presenting low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer and prostate volume up to 60 mL who underwent p-RARP between November 2018 and November 2022 were selected. Baseline, intraoperative, pathological, and postoperative data were collected and then analyzed.

Results

Thirty-seven p-RARP cases were included. Such patients presented mean age of 62 years and a mean Charlson comorbidity index of 4. Body mass index of ≥25 kg/m2 was reported by 24 (64.9%) patients, as well as 7 (18.9%) patients reported a past surgical history. Mean prostate volume and median prostate-specific antigen were 41 mL and 6.2 ng/mL, respectively. The median operative time was 242 min. The positive surgical margin rate was 45.9%. In terms of postoperative complications, 10 patients reported complications with any grade; however, a single case (2.7%) of major (Clavien-Dindo grade ≥3) complication was observed. No patient with biochemical recurrence or distant metastasis was reported at 2 years of follow-up. Recovery of continence rates were 67.6%, 75.7%, and 92.9%, at 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months after surgery, respectively.

Conclusion

p-RARP is a challenging but safe minimally invasive approach for selected patients with prostate cancer suitable for radical prostatectomy, showing outstanding functional recovery. Despite positive surgical margin rates being relatively high, no cases of biochemical recurrence or distant metastasis were reported after a median follow-up of 30 months.

Single-port robotic partial nephrectomy: impact on perioperative outcomes and hospital stay

Single-port (SP) robotic surgery is a novel technology and is at the beginning of its adoption curve in urology. The goal of this narrative review is to provide an overview of SP-robotic partial nephrectomy (PN) 4 years after the introduction of the da Vinci SP dedicated platform, focusing on perioperative outcomes, length of stay, and surgical technique. A nonsystematic review of the literature was conducted. The research included the most updated articles that referred to SP robotic PN. Since its commercial release in 2018, several institutions have reproduced robotic PN by using the SP platform, both via a transperitoneal and a retroperitoneal approach. The published SP-robotic PN series are generally based on preliminary experiences by surgeons who had previous experience with conventional multi-arms robotic platforms. The reported outcomes are encouraging. Overall, three studies reported that SP-robotic PN cases had nonsignificantly different operative time, estimated blood loss, overall complications rate, and length of stay compared to the conventional 'multi-arms' robotic PN. However, in all these series, renal masses treated by SP had overall lower complexity. Moreover, two studies underlined decreased postoperative pain as a major pro of adopting the SP system. This should reduce/avoid the need for opioids after surgery. No study compared SP-robotic versus multi-arms robotic PN in cost-effectiveness. Published experience with SP-robotic PN has reported the feasibility and safety of the approach. Preliminary results are encouraging and at least noninferior with respect to those from the multi-arms series. Prospective comparative studies with long-term oncologic and functional results are awaited to draw more definitive conclusions and better establish the more appropriate indications of SP robotics in the field of PN.

Xi Nerve-sparing Robotic Radical Perineal Prostatectomy: European Single-center Technique and Outcomes

Background

Radical prostatectomy (RP) represents the standard of care for the treatment of patients with organ-confined prostatic cancer. Historically, perineal RP has been described as the first surgical approach for the complete removal of the prostatic gland. In the past years, robotic techniques provided some technical advantages that allow resuming alternative approaches, such as robotic radical perineal prostatectomy (r-RPP).

Objective

To present in detail the technique of Xi nerve-sparing r-RPP and to report perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes from a European tertiary center.

Design setting and participants

Patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostatic cancer not suitable for active surveillance and prostate volume up to 60 ml who underwent r-RPP between November 2018 and December 2020 were identified.

Surgical procedure

All patients underwent Xi nerve-sparing r-RPP.

Measurements

Baseline characteristics and intraoperative, pathological, and postoperative data were collected and analyzed. The complications were reported according to the standardized methodology to report complications proposed by European Association of Urology guidelines.

Results and limitations

Overall, our series included 26 patients who underwent r-RPP. Patients' median age was 62.5 yr. Thirteen (50%) and eight (30.7%) patients showed a body mass index (BMI) of 25-30 and >30, respectively. A history of past surgical procedures was present in seven (26.8%) patients. The median prostate volume was 40 (interquartile range [IQR]: 28-52) ml. The median operative time and blood lost were 246 (IQR: 230-268) min and 275 (IQR: 200-400) ml, respectively. Overall, four (15.4%) patients reported intraoperative complications and five (19.2%) reported postoperative complications, with one (3.8%) reporting major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3). No patient with biochemical recurrence (BCR) was reported at 1 yr of follow-up. Continence rates were 73.0%, 84.6%, and 92.3%, respectively, at 3, 6, and 12 mo after surgery. Erectile potency recovery rates were 57.1%, 66.6%, and 80.9% at 3, 6, and 12 mo of follow-up, respectively.

Conclusions

Xi r-RPP is a challenging but safe minimally invasive approach for selected patients. No patient reported BCR at 12 mo. The choice of the surgical approach for RP is likely to be based on the patient's characteristics as well as the surgeon's preferences.

Patient summary

Our study suggests that Xi radical perineal prostatectomy is a safe minimally invasive approach for patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostatic cancer, and complex abdominal surgical history or comorbidities.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and priapism: An unexplored association

Background

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has an established impact on multiple organ systems, including the vascular and urogenital systems. Vascular effects may include venous thromboembolic disease, which could theoretically be a precursor to priapism-a urological emergency defined as an abnormal condition of prolonged penile erection lasting >4 hours. To better explore this association, we critically appraised all the published COVID-19 cases associated with priapism.

Materials and methods

After PROSPERO registration (CRD42021245257), a systematic search of Google Scholar, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Global Index Medicus, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was performed using specific search terms. The following study metadata were extracted: age, requirement for respiratory support, cavernous blood gas findings, management of priapism, and patient outcomes.

Results

Fifteen single-patient case reports were included in this review. Of these, all of the patients presented with ischemic priapism, 9 patients (60.0%) were >60 years of age, 4 (26.7%) reported more than a single episode of priapism, 11 (73.3%) presented with pneumonia, 8 (53.3%) required mechanical ventilation, D-dimer was elevated in 5 of the 6 (83.3%) patients in whom this was reported, and among the 13 patients in whom mortality was reported, 4 (30.8%) died.

Conclusions

Early reports suggest a prognostic relationship between COVID-19 and coexisting priapism. However, owing to commonalities in their pathophysiology and the small dataset reported in the literature, the probable association between COVID-19 and priapism is still theoretical. Further research is needed to confirm this association.

Retroperitoneal Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis of Comparative Outcomes

Context

Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN) has gained increasing popularity as primary minimally invasive surgical treatment for localized renal tumors, and it has preferably been performed with a transperitoneal approach. However, the retroperitoneal approach represents an alternative approach given potential advantages.

Objective

To provide an updated analysis of the comparative outcomes of retroperitoneal RAPN (R-RAPN) versus transperitoneal RAPN (T-RAPN).

Evidence acquisition

A systematic review of the literature was performed up to September 2021 using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. A sensitivity analysis was performed considering only matched-pair studies.

Evidence synthesis

Seventeen studies, which were published between 2013 and 2021, were retrieved. None of them was a randomized clinical trial. Among the 6,266 patients included in the meta-analysis, 2261 (36.1%) and 4,005 (63.9%) underwent R-RAPN and T-RAPN, respectively. No significant difference was found in terms of baseline features. The T-RAPN group presented a higher rate of male patients (odds ratio [OR]: 0.86, p = 0.03) and larger tumor size (weighted mean difference [WMD]: 0.2 cm; p = 0.003). The R-RAPN group reported more frequent posterior renal masses (OR: 0.23; p < 0.0001). The retroperitoneal approach presented lower estimated blood loss (WMD: 30.41 ml; p = 0.001), shorter operative time (OT; WMD: 20.36 min; p = 0.0001), and shorter length of stay (LOS; WMD: 0.35 d; p = 0.002). Overall complication rates were 13.7% and 16.05% in the R-RAPN and T-RAPN groups, respectively (OR: 1.32; p = 0.008). There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups regarding major (Clavien-Dindo classification ≥3 grade) complication rate, “pentafecta” achievement, as well as positive margin rates. When considering only matched-pair studies, no difference between groups was found in terms of baseline characteristics. Posterior renal masses were more frequent in the R-RAPN group (OR: 0.6; p = 0.03). Similar to the analysis of the entire cohort, R-RAPN reported lower EBL (WMD: 35.56 ml; p < 0.0001) and a shorter OT (WMD: 18.31 min; p = 0.03). Overall and major complication rates were similar between the two groups. The LOS was significantly lower for R-RAPN (WMD: 0.46 d; p = 0.02). No statistically significant difference was found between groups in terms of overall PSM rates.

Conclusions

R-RAPN offers similar surgical outcomes to T-RAPN, and it carries potential advantages in terms of shorter OT and LOS. Available evidence remains limited by the lack of randomized clinical trials.

Patient summary

In this review of the literature, we looked at comparative outcomes of two surgical approaches to robot-assisted partial nephrectomy. We found that the retroperitoneal technique offers similar surgical outcomes to the transperitoneal one, with potential advantages in terms of shorter operative time and length of hospital stay.

The impact the COVID-19 pandemic on urology literature: a bibliometric analysis

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused wide-reaching change to many aspects of life on a worldwide scale. The impact of these changes on peer-reviewed research journals, including those dedicated to urology, is still unknown.

Material and methods

The Web of Science database was queried to retrieve all COVID-19 urological articles written in English language and published between January 1st, 2020 and December 10th, 2021. Only original and review articles were considered. A bibliometric analysis of the total number of papers, citations, institutions and publishing journals was performed. Non-COVID-19 publications were also retrieved to compare the duration of publication stages.

Results

A total of 428 COVID-19 articles and 14,874 non-COVID-19 articles were collected. Significant differences in the duration of all the publication stages were found between COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 articles (all p <0.001). The most productive countries were the USA (100 articles), Italy (59 articles) and the United Kingdom (55 articles). The published literature has focused on four topics: COVID-19 genitourinary manifestations, management of urological diseases during the pandemic, repercussions on quality of life and impact on healthcare providers.

Conclusions

A significant reduction in peer review time for COVID-19 articles might raise concerns regarding the quality of peer review itself. USA, Italy and UK published the highest number of COVID-19 related articles. Restrictive measures taken by governments to reduce the spread of infection had a strong impact on mental stress and anxiety of patients and healthcare professionals. A coerced deferral of diagnosis and treatment of emergencies and uro-oncological cases represented the most challenging task from a clinical standpoint.

COVID-19 pandemic impact on uro-oncological disease outcomes at an Italian tertiary referral center

Purpose

To assess differences in referral and pathologic outcomes for uro-oncology cases prior to and during the COVID pandemic, comparing clinical and pathological data of cancer surgeries performed at an academic referral center between 2019 and 2020.

Methods

We collected data of 880 prostate biopsies, 393 robot-assisted radical prostatectomies (RARP) for prostate cancer (PCa), 767 trans-urethral resections of bladder tumor (TURB) and 134 radical cystectomies (RC) for bladder cancer (BCa), 29 radical nephro-ureterectomies (RNU) for upper tract urothelial carcinoma, 130 partial nephrectomies (PN) and 12 radical nephrectomies (RN) for renal cancer, and 41 orchifunicolectomies for testicular cancer. Data of patients treated in 2019 (before COVID-19 pandemic) were compared to patients treated in 2020 (during pandemic).

Results

No significant decline in uro-oncological surgical activity was seen between 2019 and 2020. No significant increase in time between diagnosis and surgery was observed for all considered cancers. No differences in terms of main pathologic features were observed in patients undergoing RARP, TURB, RNU, RN/PN, or orchifunicolectomy. A higher proportion of ISUP grade 3 and 4 PCa were diagnosed in 2020 at biopsy (p = 0.001), but this did not translate into worse pathological grade/stage at RARP. In 2020, more advanced disease features were seen after RC, including lymph node involvement (p = 0.01) and non-organ confined disease (p = 0.02).

Conclusion

Neither decline in uro-oncologic activity nor delay between diagnosis and treatment was observed at our institution during the first year of COVID-19 pandemic. No significant worsening of cancer disease features was found in 2020 except for muscle-invasive BCa.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00345-021-03842-y.

A literature survey of the robotic technologies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Since the late 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic has been spread all around the world. The pandemic is a critical challenge to the health and safety of the general public, the medical staff and the medical systems worldwide. It has been globally proposed to utilise robots during the pandemic, to improve the treatment of patients and leverage the load of the medical system. However, there is still a lack of detailed and systematic review of the robotic research for the pandemic, from the technologies' perspective. Thus a thorough literature survey is conducted in this research and more than 280 publications have been reviewed, with the focus on robotics during the pandemic. The main contribution of this literature survey is to answer two research questions, i.e. 1) what the main research contributions are to combat the pandemic from the robotic technologies' perspective, and 2) what the promising supporting technologies are needed during and after the pandemic to help and guide future robotics research. The current achievements of robotic technologies are reviewed and discussed in different categories, followed by the identification of the representative work's technology readiness level. The future research trends and essential technologies are then highlighted, including artificial intelligence, 5 G, big data, wireless sensor network, and human-robot collaboration.

Impact of SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic on Kidney Cancer Management

BACKGROUND: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic still has a huge impact on the management of many chronic diseases such as cancer. Few data are presently available reagarding how the management of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) has changed due to this unprecedented situation. OBJECTIVE: To discuss the challenges and issues of the diagnosis and treatment of RCC in the COVID-19 era, and to provide recommendations based on the collected literature and our personal experience. METHODS: Systematic review of the available Literature regarding the management of RCC during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. RESULTS: Our review showed a prevalence of narrative publications, raising the issue of the real relevance of the evidence retrieved. Indeed, the only original data about RCC and COVID-19 found were a small retrospective case series and two surveys, providing either patients’ or physicians’ viewpoints. CONCLUSIONS: The expected delayed diagnosis of RCC could lead to an increase of advanced/metastatic cases; thus, proper therapeutic choices for patients with small renal masses should be carefully evaluated case by case, in order to avoid negative effects on long-term survival rates. The controversial interaction between immune checkpoint blockade and COVID-19 pathogenesis is more hypothetical than evidence-based, and thus immunotherapy should not be denied, whenever appropriate. To avoid treatments which won’t have an impact on patients’ survival, a honest and accurate evaluation of the cost/benefit ratio of each treatment option should be always performed. Finally, SARS-CoV-2 swab positivity should not prevent the continuation of ongoing active treatments in asymptomatic cases, or or after symptoms’ resolution.

The Effects of COVID-19 on Cancer Care Provision: A Systematic Review

This systematic review aims to gather primary data from cancer institutions that have implemented changes to cancer service provision amid the COVID-19 outbreak to inform future intervention and health care facility response strategies. A comprehensive literature search was done on Global Health Medline and EMBASE using pertinent key words and MeSH terms relating to COVID-19 and Cancer service provision. A total of 72 articles were selected for inclusion in this systematic review. Following the narrative synthesis that was conducted of the literature, 6 core themes that encompassed common cancer service intervention adopted by institutions were identified: (1) Testing and Tracking, (2) Outreach and Communication, (3) Protection, (4) Social Distancing (5) Treatment Management, (6) Service Restructuring. Since cancer patients are a high-risk population amid the COVID-19 pandemic, these areas of targeted intervention can be used to inform necessary actions in institutions facing similar risks, based on previous learning from numerous cancer centers globally.