Comparison of transfusion requirements between open and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

A Hybrid Approach to Hood-Sparing Robotic Prostatectomy to Maximize Functional Outcomes and Maintain Early Oncologic Efficacy

Background: We detail our approach and experience with a hybrid version of the endopelvic hood-sparing (HS) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using the da Vinci robotic platform. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 200 patients who underwent RARP by a single surgeon. Patients were propensity-matched into three cohorts depending on biopsy and prostatectomy Gleason Grade Groups: traditional retropubic (RP) (n = 80), retzius-sparing (RS) (n = 40), and HS (n = 80). Patient characteristics and oncologic and functional outcomes were examined. Zero pads per day defined return of continence. Erections suitable for penetrative intercourse with/without medications defined return of sexual function. Results: Patient characteristics were similar between cohorts excluding prostate-specific antigen levels (p = 0.014), which were significantly lower in the RS cohort (7.1 ± 5.3 ng/mL) compared with RP (9.2 ± 9.3 ng/mL) and HS (8.8 ± 8.9 ng/mL). Clinically significant positive margin rates were significantly higher (p = 0.046) in the RS cohort (32.5%) compared with RP (17.5%) and HS (13.9%). Biochemical recurrence and metastasis rates were similar between all cohorts. Median time to continence was significantly lower for RS and HS-RARP (p < 0.001) compared with RP-RARP at 1.3, 1.6, and 5.4 months, respectively. Median time to return of sexual function was significantly lower for RS and HS-RARP (p < 0.001) compared with RP-RARP at 4.0, 7.7, and 15.1 months, respectively. Conclusions: Our hybrid HS-RARP approach provides functional outcomes similar to RS-RARP with the early oncologic control of traditional RP-RARP.

Cost-effectiveness of routine type and screens in select urological surgeries

PURPOSE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of obtaining a preoperative type and screen (T/S) for common urologic procedures.

METHODS

A decision tree model was constructed to track surgical patients undergoing two preoperative blood ordering strategies as follows: obtaining a preoperative T/S versus not doing so. The model was applied to the National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample (NIS) data, from January 1, 2006 to September 30, 2015. Cost estimates for the model were created from combined patient-level data with published costs of a T/S, type and crossmatch (T/C), a unit of pRBC, and one unit of emergency-release transfusion (ERT). The primary outcome was the incremental cost per ERT prevented, expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between the two preoperative blood ordering strategies. A cost-effectiveness analysis determined the ICER of obtaining preoperative T/S to prevent an emergency-release transfusion (ERT), with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $1,500.00.

RESULTS

A total of 4,113,144 surgical admissions from 2006 to 2015 were reviewed. The overall transfusion rate was 10.54% (95% CI, 10.17-10.91) for all procedures. The ICER of preoperative T/S was $1500.00 per ERT prevented. One-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the risk of transfusion should exceed 4.12% to justify preoperative T/S.

CONCLUSION

Routine preoperative T/S for radical prostatectomy (rate = 3.88%) and penile implants (rate = .91%) does not represent a cost-effective practice for these surgeries. It is important for urologists to review their institution T/S policy to reduce inefficiencies within the preoperative setting.

Influence of pneumoperitoneum and head-down maneuver on the cerebral microvasculature in rabbits

BACKGROUND

With recent advances in robot-assisted techniques, an increasing number of surgeries are being performed with pneumoperitoneum and head-down maneuver (HDM) that may affect the cerebral microcirculation. For the first time, this study investigated the direct influence of pneumoperitoneum and HDM on the cerebral microvasculature in rabbits.

METHODS

Adult male rabbits were randomly allocated to the following groups (n = 7 each): control, pneumoperitoneum alone (P), and pneumoperitoneum with HDM (P + HDM) for 120 min. A closed cranial window was installed above the parietal bone to visualize the pial microvasculature. Pial arteriolar diameter and hemodynamic and blood gas parameters were measured during the 140-min observation period. Brain edema was assessed by evaluation of the brain water content at the end of the experiment.

RESULTS

Rabbits in the P and P + HDM groups exhibited a similar degree of immediate pial arteriolar dilation following the initiation of both P and P + HDM (P: 1.11 ± 0.03, p = 0.0044 and P + HDM: 1.07 ± 0.02, p = 0.0004, relative changes from the baseline value by defining the baseline as one). In the P + HDM group, pial arteriole diameter returned to the baseline level following the discontinuation of pneumoperitoneum and HDM (1.05 ± 0.03, p = 0.0906, vs. baseline). In contrast, the pial arterioles remained dilated as compared to the baseline level in the P group after discontinuation of pneumoperitoneum. There were no changes in pial arteriole diameter in the animals in the control group. Heart rate, blood gas parameters, and brain water content were not significantly different between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The pial arterioles dilated immediately after pneumoperitoneum with or without HDM. The pial arterioles remained dilated 20 min after discontinuation of pneumoperitoneum alone but constricted upon discontinuation of pneumoperitoneum plus HDM. Pneumoperitoneum and HDM for 2 h did not cause brain edema.

Can the prophylactic administration of tranexamic acid reduce the blood loss after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy? Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy with tranEXamic acid (RARPEX): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

The prophylactic administration of tranexamic acid reduces blood loss during procedures at high risk of perioperative bleeding. Several studies in cardiac surgery and orthopedics confirmed this finding. The aim of this prospective, double-blind, randomized study is to evaluate the effect of tranexamic acid on peri-and postoperative blood loss and on the incidence and severity of complications.

Methods/design

Based on the results of our pilot study, we decided to conduct this prospective, double-blind, randomized trial to confirm the preliminary data. The primary endpoint is to analyze the effect of tranexamic acid on perioperative and postoperative blood loss (decrease in hemoglobin levels) in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. The additional endpoint is to analyze the effect of tranexamic acid on postoperative complications and confirm the safety of tranexamic acid in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Discussion

No study to date has tested the prophylactic administration of tranexamic acid at the beginning of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. This study is designed to answer the question of whether the administration of tranexamic acid might lower the blood loss after the procedure or increase the rate and severity of complications.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04319614. Registered on 25 March 2020

A ‘real-world’ standard for radical prostatectomy: Analysis of the British Association of Urological Surgeons Complex Operations Reports, 2016–2018

Objective:

To produce comprehensive and detailed benchmarking data allowing surgeons and patients to compare practice against, by using all recorded radical prostatectomies across a 3-year period in England.

Patients and methods:

The British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) manages the radical prostatectomy (RP) Complex Operations Database. Surgical departments upload data which they can review and amend before lockdown and data cleansing. Analysis of 2016–2018 data held on the BAUS Complex Operations Database was performed for 21,973 patients undergoing RP in England, producing procedure-specific benchmarking data. General linear models were used to assess differences in patient selection between different operative modalities. Analysis involved assessment of case selection, operative decisions and outcomes, case volume and pathological outcomes.

Results:

Using national Hospital Episode Statistics, the BAUS RP dataset was estimated 91% complete. Median age was 65 and 96% were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Grades 1–2. Over 80% had RP performed in a high-volume centre (>100 annual RPs) and 88% had Gleason grade group (GGG) ⩾2 disease on biopsy. Robotic-assisted RP (RARP), laparoscopic RP (LRP) and open RP (ORP) were performed in 85%, 7.2% and 7.7% of cases, respectively. Patient and disease characteristics differed across surgical modalities. Transfusion rates were 0.14% in RARP, 0.38% in LRP and 1.8% in ORP. Increased positive surgical margin (PSM) rates were observed with increasing prostate-specific antigen (PSA), GGG and T-stage, with comparable PSM rates across surgical modalities. Lymph node dissection was performed more commonly in high-risk cases (cT3, PSA > 20, GGG ⩾ 4). Pathological upstaging was common. Median length of stay was 1, 2 and 3 days for RARP, LRP and ORP, respectively. ORP had Clavien–Dindo complications ⩾3 and unplanned hospital readmissions.

Conclusion:

This analysis has enabled the first set of UK national RP standards to be produced allowing procedure, patient and disease-specific national, centre and individual comparisons. The present degree of service centralisation, operative modalities, and specific aspects of surgical practice can be observed.

Level of evidence:

2b

Safety and feasibility of urological procedures in Jehovah's Witness patients

OBJECTIVES

To describe the safety and feasibility of urological transfusion-free surgeries in Jehovah's Witness patients.

METHODS

An institutional review board-approved, retrospective review of Jehovah's Witness patients who underwent urological transfusion-free surgeries between 2003 and 2019 was carried out. Surgeries were stratified into low, intermediate and high risk based on complexity, invasiveness and bleeding potential. Patient demographics, perioperative data and clinical outcomes are reported.

RESULTS

A total of 161 Jehovah's Witness patients (median age 63.4 years) underwent 171 transfusion-free surgeries, including 57 (33.3%) in low-, 82 (47.9%) in intermediate- and 32 (18.8%) in high-risk categories. The mean estimated blood loss increased with risk category at 48 mL (range 10-50 mL), 150 mL (range 50-200 mL) and 388 mL (range 137-500 mL), respectively (P < 0.001). Implementing blood augmentation and conservation techniques increased with each risk category (3.5% vs 29% vs 69%, respectively; P < 0.001). Average length of stay increased concordantly at 1.6 days (range 0-12 days), 2.9 days (range 1-13 days) and 5.6 days (range 2-12 days), respectively (P ≤ 0.001). However, there was no increase in complication rates and readmission rates attributed to bleeding among the risk categories at 30 days (P = 0.9 and 0.4, respectively) and 90 days (P = 0.7 and 0.7, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Transfusion free urological surgery can be safely carried out on Jehovah's Witness patients using contemporary perioperative optimization. Additionally, these techniques can be expanded for use in the general patient population to avoid short- and long-term consequences of perioperative blood transfusion.

The lymphocyte/monocyte ratio and red blood cell transfusion during radical retropubic prostatectomy

Purpose

Despite improvements of strategy in radical retropubic prostatectomy, blood loss is still a major concern. The lymphocyte/monocyte (LM) ratio is a prognostic indicator for various diseases. We identified the risk factors, including the LM ratio, for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion during radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Methods

This retrospective study assessed patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy between March 2009 and December 2020. To determine the risk factors for RBC transfusion, a multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was also performed. Postoperative outcomes, including acute kidney injury (AKI), hospitalization duration, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission, were also evaluated.

Results

Among 1302 patients, 158 patients (12.1%) received an intraoperative RBC transfusion. Multivariate logistic regression analysis demonstrated that the risk factors for RBC transfusion were the LM ratio, hemoglobin, 6% hydroxyethyl starch amount, and positive surgical margin. The area under the ROC curve of LM ratio was 0.706 (cut-off = 4.3). The LM ratio at ≤ 4.3 was significantly related to transfusion in multivariate-adjusted analysis (odds ratio = 4.598, P < 0.001). AKI and ICU admission were significantly higher, and the hospitalization duration was significantly longer in patients with RBC transfusion.

Conclusions

The LM ratio was a risk factor for RBC transfusion in radical retropubic prostatectomy. The optimal cut-off value of the LM ratio to predict transfusion was 4.3. RBC transfusion was associated with poor postoperative outcomes. Therefore, our results suggest that the LM ratio provide useful information on RBC transfusion in radical retropubic prostatectomy.

Perioperative Blood Loss after Preoperative Prostatic Artery Embolization in Patients Undergoing Simple Prostatectomy: A Propensity Score‒Matched Study

PURPOSE

To assess perioperative blood loss following prostatic artery embolization (PAE) before surgery in patients undergoing simple prostatectomy.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was used to identify 63 patients (mean age, 65.3 ± 8.0 years) with prostatic hypertrophy and severe lower urinary tract symptoms who underwent prostatectomy from September 2014 to December 2019, 18 (28.5%) of whom underwent PAE before surgery. Demographic data, pertinent laboratory results, procedural or operative information, hospital course details, and pathology reports were obtained. A 2:1 propensity score‒matching analysis was performed to compare intraoperative blood loss in patients who underwent prostatectomy alone with intraoperative blood loss in those who first underwent bilateral PAE before surgery.

RESULTS

Sixteen (89%) of the 18 patients underwent bilateral PAE before surgery. Thirty-two patients who underwent prostatectomy without embolization before surgery were selected for the 2:1 propensity score‒matched analysis based on age, race, surgery type, prostate gland size, and comorbidities. The mean estimated blood loss (EBL) for prostatectomy alone was 545 ± 380 mL (mean ± standard deviation). There was a statistically significant reduction in the EBL for patients who underwent bilateral PAE (303 ± 227 mL, P < .01). The operative time was also significantly decreased for patients who underwent PAE before surgery (P < .05). For patients who underwent PAE, there were no complications related to the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Bilateral PAE before surgery appears to be safe and may be effective in reducing perioperative bleeding and operative time.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of robotic-assisted versus retropubic radical prostatectomy: a single cancer center experience

Prostate cancer (PCa) treatment has been greatly impacted by the robotic surgery. The economics literature about PCa is scarce. We aim to carry-out cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses of the robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) using the "time-driven activity-based cost" methodology. Patients who underwent radical prostatectomy in 2013 were retrospectively analyzed in a cancer center over a 5-year period. Fifty-six patients underwent RALP and 149 patients underwent retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP). The amounts were subject to a 5% discount as correction of monetary value considering time elapsed. Calculation of the Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratios (ICER) related to events avoided and the Incremental Cost-Utility Ratio (ICUR) related to "QALY saved" were performed. QALY was performed using values of utility and "disutility" weights from the "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry". Hypothetical cohorts were simulated with 1000 patients in each group, based on the treatment outcomes. Total and average costs were R$1,903,671.93, and R$12,776.32 for the RRP group, and R$1,373,987.26, and R$24,535.49 for the RALP group, respectively. The costs to treat the hypothetical cohorts were R$10,010,582.35 for RRP, and R$19,224,195.90 for RALP. ICER calculation evidenced R$9,213,613.55 of difference between groups. ICUR was R$ 22,690.83 per QALY saved. Limitations were the lack of cost-effectiveness analyses related to re-hospitalization rates and complications, single center perspective, and currency-translation differences. Medical fees were not included. RALP showed advantages in cost-effectiveness and cost-utility over RRP in the long term. Despite the increased costs to the introduction of robotic technology, its adoption should be encouraged due to the gains.

Use, Cost, Complications, and Mortality of Robotic versus Nonrobotic General Surgery Procedures Based on a Nationwide Database

Since its introduction in 1997, robotic surgery has overcome many limitations, including setup costs and surgeon training. The use of robotics in general surgery remains unknown. This study evaluates robotic-assisted procedures in general surgery by comparing characteristics with its nonrobotic (laparoscopic and open) counterparts. Weighted Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample data (2008, 2009) were used to identify the top 12 procedures for robotic general surgery. Robotic cases were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes 17.41 and 17.42. Procedures were grouped: esophagogastric, colorectal, adrenalectomy, lysis of adhesion, and cholecystectomy. Analyses were descriptive, t tests, χ2s, and logistic regression. Charges and length of stay were adjusted for gender, age, race, payer, hospital bed size, hospital location, hospital region, median household income, Charlson score, and procedure type. There were 1,389,235 (97.4%) nonrobotic and 37,270 (2.6%) robotic cases. Robotic cases increased from 0.8 per cent (2008) to 4.3 per cent (2009, P < 0.001). In all subgroups, robotic surgery had significantly shorter lengths of stay (4.9 days) than open surgery (6.1 days) and lower charges (median $30,540) than laparoscopic ($34,537) and open ($46,704) surgery. Fewer complications were seen in robotic-assisted colorectal, adrenalectomy and lysis of adhesion; however, robotic cholecystectomy and esophagogastric procedures had higher complications than nonrobotic surgery ( P < 0.05). Overall robotic surgery had a lower mortality rate (0.097%) than nonrobotic surgeries per 10,000 procedures (laparoscopic 0.48%, open 0.92%; P < 0.001). The cost of robotic surgery is generally considered a prohibitive factor. In the present study, when overall cost was considered, including length of stay, robotic surgery appeared to be cost-effective and as safe as nonrobotic surgery except in cholecystectomy and esophagogastric procedures. Further study is needed to fully understand the long-term implications of this new technology.

Reducing preoperative blood orders and costs for radical prostatectomy

Aim: A maximum surgical blood order schedule (MSBOS) was implemented at our institution to optimize preoperative blood ordering and reduce unnecessary blood preparation for patients undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP), a common urologic procedure. Materials & methods: We conducted a retrospective review of patients who underwent RP from 2010 to 2016 and categorized patients by date of RP (pre- or post-MSBOS) and compared preoperative blood-ordering practices. Results: After MSBOS implementation, preoperative blood orders changed from predominantly type and cross-match 2 units (53%) to no sample (56%) for robot-assisted laparoscopic RP, and from mostly type and cross-match 2 units (62%) to type and screen (75%) for open RP with resultant cost savings. Conclusion: MSBOS implementation and compliance decreases unnecessary preoperative blood orders.

The impact of intra-operative cell salvage during open radical prostatectomy

Background

To examine the effect of intra-operative cell salvage (ICS) in open radical prostatectomy.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, all patients undergoing open radical prostatectomy for malignancy at our institution between 10/04/2013 and 10/04/2017 were enrolled. Patients were grouped and compared based on whether they received ICS. Primary outcomes were allogeneic transfusion rates, and disease recurrence. Secondary outcomes were complications and transfusion-related cost.

Results

Fifty-nine men were enrolled; 30 used no blood conservation technique, while 29 employed ICS. There were no significant differences between groups in age, pre- or post-operative haemoglobin, Charlson comorbidity index, operation duration or length of stay. Tumour characteristics were also similar between groups, including pre-operative prostate specific antigen, post-operative Gleason score, T-stage, nodal status and rates of margin positivity. Compared with controls, the ICS group had longer follow up (945 vs. 989 days; P=0.0016). The control and ICS groups were not significantly different in rates of tumour recurrence (6 vs. 3 patients; P=0.30) or complications (10 vs. 5 patients; P=0.16). While the proportion of patients receiving allogenic transfusion was similar (9 vs. 6 patients; P=0.41), fewer red blood products transfused (40 vs. 12 units) meant transfusion related costs were lower in ICS patients (AUD $47,666 vs. $37,429).

Conclusions

ICS reduced transfusion related costs, without affecting allogeneic transfusion rates, tumour recurrence or complication rates. These findings extend the literature supporting ICS in oncological surgery. Prospective randomised studies are needed to confirm the existing level III evidence.

Robotic vs. Retropubic radical prostatectomy in prostate cancer: A systematic review and an meta-analysis update

CONTEXT

The safety and feasibility of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) compared with retropubic radical prostatectomy(RRP) is debated. Recently, a number of large-scale and high-quality studies have been conducted.

OBJECTIVE

To obtain a more valid assessment, we update the meta-analysis of RARP compared with RRP to assessed its safety and feasibility in treatment of prostate cancer.

METHODS

A systematic search of Medline, Embase, Pubmed, and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify studies that compared RARP with RRP. Outcomes of interest included perioperative, pathologic variables and complications.

RESULTS

78 studies assessing RARP vs. RRP were included for meta-analysis. Although patients underwent RRP have shorter operative time than RARP (WMD: 39.85 minutes; P < 0.001), patients underwent RARP have less intraoperative blood loss (WMD = -507.67ml; P < 0.001), lower blood transfusion rates (OR = 0.13; P < 0.001), shorter time to remove catheter (WMD = -3.04day; P < 0.001), shorter hospital stay (WMD = -1.62day; P < 0.001), lower PSM rates (OR:0.88; P = 0.04), fewer positive lymph nodes (OR:0.45;P < 0.001), fewer overall complications (OR:0.43; P < 0.001), higher 3- and 12-mo potent recovery rate (OR:3.19;P = 0.02; OR:2.37; P = 0.005, respectively), and lower readmission rate (OR:0.70, P = 0.03). The biochemical recurrence free survival of RARP is better than RRP (OR:1.33, P = 0.04). All the other calculated results are similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that RARP appears to be safe and effective to its counterpart RRP in selected patients.

Comparison of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Open Radical Prostatectomy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

To systematically update evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) in patients with prostate cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic databases, including ovidMEDLINE, ovidEMBASE, the Cochrane Library, KoreaMed, KMbase, and others, were searched, collecting data from January 1980 to August 2013. The quality of selected systematic reviews was assessed using the revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews and the modified Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for non-randomized studies.

RESULTS

A total of 61 studies were included, including 38 from two previous systematic reviews rated as best available evidence and 23 additional studies that were more recent. There were no randomized controlled trials. Regarding safety, the risk of complications was lower for RARP than for RRP. Among functional outcomes, the risk of urinary incontinence was lower and potency rate was significantly higher for RARP than for RRP. Regarding oncologic outcomes, positive margin rates were comparable between groups, and although biochemical recurrence (BCR) rates were lower for RARP than for RRP, recurrence-free survival was similar after long-term follow up.

CONCLUSION

RARP might be favorable to RRP in regards to post-operative complications, peri-operative outcomes, and functional outcomes. Positive margin and BCR rates were comparable between the two procedures. As most of studies were of low quality, the results presented should be interpreted with caution, and further high quality studies controlling for selection, confounding, and selective reporting biases with longer-term follow-up are needed to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of RARP.

Robotic surgery: disruptive innovation or unfulfilled promise? A systematic review and meta-analysis of the first 30 years

Background

Robotic surgery has been in existence for 30 years. This study aimed to evaluate the overall perioperative outcomes of robotic surgery compared with open surgery (OS) and conventional minimally invasive surgery (MIS) across various surgical procedures.

Methods

MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from 1990 up to October 2013 with no language restriction. Relevant review articles were hand-searched for remaining studies. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective comparative studies (PROs) on perioperative outcomes, regardless of patient age and sex, were included. Primary outcomes were blood loss, blood transfusion rate, operative time, length of hospital stay, and 30-day overall complication rate.

Results

We identified 99 relevant articles (108 studies, 14,448 patients). For robotic versus OS, 50 studies (11 RCTs, 39 PROs) demonstrated reduction in blood loss [ratio of means (RoM) 0.505, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.408–0.602], transfusion rate [risk ratio (RR) 0.272, 95 % CI 0.165–0.449], length of hospital stay (RoM 0.695, 0.615–0.774), and 30-day overall complication rate (RR 0.637, 0.483–0.838) in favour of robotic surgery. For robotic versus MIS, 58 studies (21 RCTs, 37 PROs) demonstrated reduced blood loss (RoM 0.853, 0.736–0.969) and transfusion rate (RR 0.621, 0.390–0.988) in favour of robotic surgery but similar length of hospital stay (RoM 0.982, 0.936–1.027) and 30-day overall complication rate (RR 0.988, 0.822–1.188). In both comparisons, robotic surgery prolonged operative time (OS: RoM 1.073, 1.022–1.124; MIS: RoM 1.135, 1.096–1.173). The benefits of robotic surgery lacked robustness on RCT-sensitivity analyses. However, many studies, including the relatively few available RCTs, suffered from high risk of bias and inadequate statistical power.

Conclusions

Our results showed that robotic surgery contributed positively to some perioperative outcomes but longer operative times remained a shortcoming. Better quality evidence is needed to guide surgical decision making regarding the precise clinical targets of this innovation in the next generation of its use.

Utilization of a novel valveless trocar system during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of a novel valveless trocar system (VTS) on perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP).

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review was performed of 792 patients undergoing RALP. Preoperative patient variables, tumor characteristics, and perioperative variables were collected and analyzed. The first 150 patients were excluded from analysis to account for the learning curve of robotic surgery. Univariate and multivariate linear regression models were used to assess factors affecting operative time (ORT).

RESULTS

A total of 257 and 385 patients underwent RALP utilizing the VTS and conventional insufflation, respectively. There were no significant differences in American Society of Anesthesiologist score, body mass index (BMI), prostate volume, final Gleason score, estimated blood loss, and complications between the cohorts. The only difference noted was a significantly shorter mean ORT in the VTS cohort (149.5 vs. 170.1 min, p < 0.0001). In light of this finding, further analysis was performed to identify associations with ORT. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that VTS, BMI, final Gleason score, prostate volume, surgeon, and node dissection were significantly associated with ORT. The use of the VTS decreased mean ORT by 23.2 min when controlling for confounding factors (p < 0.001). The performance of a nerve sparing operation was found to decrease ORT by 15.9 min (p < 0.001), though more often performed for lower-risk disease.

CONCLUSION

The use of a novel VTS demonstrated decreased ORT in patients undergoing RALP when controlling for confounding factors. Prospective randomized trials are needed to evaluate its ultimate benefit in various surgical cohorts.

Robotics in urologic oncology

Robotic surgery was initially developed to overcome problems faced during conventional laparoscopic surgeries and to perform telesurgery at distant locations. It has now established itself as the epitome of minimally invasive surgery (MIS). It is one of the most significant advances in MIS in recent years and is considered by many as a revolutionary technology, capable of influencing the future of surgery. After its introduction to urology, robotic surgery has redefined the management of urological malignancies. It promises to make difficult urological surgeries easier, safer and more acceptable to both the surgeon and the patient. Robotic surgery is slowly, but surely establishing itself in India. In this article, we provide an overview of the advantages, disadvantages, current status, and future applications of robotic surgery for urologic cancers in the context of the Indian scenario.

Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy vs. Open Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP) remains the "gold standard" for surgical treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa). Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a robotic surgery used worldwide. The aim of this study is to collect the data available in the literature on RARP and ORP, and further evaluate the overall safety and efficacy of RARP vs. ORP for the treatment of clinically localized PCa. A literature search was performed using electronic databases between January 2009 and October 2013. Clinical data such as operation duration, transfusion rate, positive surgical margins (PSM), nerve sparing, 3- and 12-month urinary continence, and potency were pooled to carry out meta-analysis. Six studies were enrolled for this meta-analysis. The operation duration of RARP group was longer than that of ORP group (weighted mean difference = 64.84). There was no statistically significant difference in the transfusion rate, PSM rate, and between RARP and ORP (transfusion rate, OR = 0.30; PSM rate, OR = 0.94). No significant difference was seen in 3- and 12-month urinary continence recovery (3 months, OR = 1.32; 12 months, OR = 1.30). There was a statistically significant difference in potency between the 3- and 12-month groups (3 months, OR = 2.80; 12 months, OR = 1.70). RARP is a safe and feasible surgical technique for the treatment of clinically localized PCa owing to the advantages of fewer perioperative complications and quicker patency recovery.

Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: surgical, oncological, and functional outcomes: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Despite the wide diffusion of minimally invasive approaches, such as laparoscopic (LRP) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP), few studies compare the results of these techniques with the retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) approach. The aim of this study is to compare the surgical, functional, and oncological outcomes and cost-effectiveness of RRP, LRP, and RALP.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed in the PubMed and Embase databases in December 2013. A 'free-text' protocol using the term 'radical prostatectomy' was applied. A total of 16,085 records were found. The authors reviewed the records to identify comparative studies to include in the review.

RESULTS

44 comparative studies were identified. With regard to the perioperative outcome, LRP and RALP were more time-consuming than RRP, but blood loss, transfusion rates, catheterisation time, hospitalisation duration, and complication rates were the most optimal in the laparoscopic approaches. With regard to the functional and oncological results, RALP was found to have the best outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our study confirmed the well-known perioperative advantage of minimally invasive techniques; however, available data were not sufficient to prove the superiority of any surgical approach in terms of functional and oncologic outcomes. On the contrary, cost comparison clearly supports RRP.

Are HIV-infected men vulnerable to prostate cancer treatment disparities?

BACKGROUND

HIV-infected (HIV(+)) men face cancer treatment disparities that impact outcome. Prostate cancer treatment and treatment appropriateness in HIV(+) men are unknown.

METHODS

We used electronic chart review to conduct a retrospective cohort study of 43 HIV(+) cases with prostate cancer and 86 age- and race-matched HIV-uninfected (HIV(-)) controls with prostate cancer, ages 40 to 79 years, from 2001 to 2012. We defined treatment appropriateness using National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines and the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) to estimate life expectancy.

RESULTS

Median age was 59.5 years at prostate cancer diagnosis. Median CD4(+) T-cell count was 459.5 cells/mm(3), 95.3% received antiretroviral therapy, and 87.1% were virally suppressed. Radical prostatectomy was the primary treatment for 39.5% of HIV(+) and 71.0% of HIV(-) men (P = 0.004). Only 16.3% of HIV(+) versus 57.0% of HIV(-) men received open radical prostatectomy (P < 0.001). HIV(+) men received more radiotherapy (25.6% vs. 16.3%, P = 0.13). HIV was negatively associated with open radical prostatectomy (OR = 0.03, P = 0.007), adjusting for insurance and CCI. No men were undertreated. Fewer HIV(+) men received appropriate treatment (89.2% vs. 100%, P = 0.003), due to four overtreated HIV(+) men. Excluding AIDS from the CCI still resulted in fewer HIV(+) men receiving appropriate treatment (94.6% vs. 100%, P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Prostate cancer in HIV(+) men is largely appropriately treated. Under- or overtreatment may occur from difficulties in life expectancy estimation. HIV(+) men may receive more radiotherapy and fewer radical prostatectomies, specifically open radical prostatectomies.

IMPACT

Research on HIV/AIDS survival indices and etiologies and outcomes of this prostate cancer treatment disparity in HIV(+) men are needed.

Benchmarks for operative outcomes of robotic and open radical prostatectomy: results from the Health Professionals Follow-up Study

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has become increasingly common; however, there have been no nationwide, population-based, non-claims-based studies to evaluate differences in outcomes between RALP and open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP).

OBJECTIVE

To determine surgical, oncologic, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes following RALP and RRP in a nationwide cohort.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We identified 903 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study diagnosed with prostate cancer between 2000 and 2010 who underwent radical prostatectomy using RALP (n=282) or RRP (n=621) as primary treatment.

INTERVENTION

Radical prostatectomy.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

We compared patients undergoing RALP or RRP across a range of perioperative, oncologic, and HRQOL outcomes.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

Use of RALP increased during the study period, constituting 85.2% of study subjects in 2009, up from 4.5% in 2003. Patients undergoing RALP compared to RRP were less likely to have a lymph node dissection (51.5% vs 85.4%; p<0.0001), had less blood loss (207.4 ml vs 852.3 ml; p<0.0001), were less likely to receive blood transfusions (4.3% vs 30.3%; p<0.0001), and had shorter hospital stays (1.8 d vs 2.9 d; p<0.0001). Surgical, oncologic, and HRQOL outcomes did not differ significantly among the groups. In multivariate logistic regression models, there were no significant differences in 3- or 5-yr recurrence-free survival comparing RALP versus RRP (hazard ratios: 0.98 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.46-2.08] and 0.75 [95% CI, 0.18-3.11], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In a nationwide cohort of patients undergoing surgical treatment for prostate cancer, RALP was associated with shorter hospital stay, and lower blood loss and transfusion rates than RRP. Surgical oncologic and HRQOL outcomes were similar between groups.

PATIENT SUMMARY

We studied men throughout the United States with prostate cancer who underwent surgical removal of the prostate. We found that robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy resulted in shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, and fewer blood transfusions than radical retropubic prostatectomy. There were no differences in cancer control or health-related quality of life.

Does robotic prostatectomy meet its promise in the management of prostate cancer?

Following Walsh's advances in pelvic anatomy and surgical technique to minimize intraoperative peri-prostatic trauma more than 30 years ago, open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) evolved to become the gold standard treatment of localized prostate cancer, with excellent long-term survival outcomes [1•]. However, RRP is performed with great heterogeneity, even among high volume surgeons, and subtle differences in surgical technique result in clinically significant differences in recovery of urinary and sexual function. Since the initial description of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in 2000 [2], and U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval shortly thereafter, RARP has been rapidly adopted and has overtaken RRP as the most popular surgical approach in the management of prostate cancer in the United States [3]. However, the surgical management of prostate cancer remains controversial. This is confounded by the idolatry of new technologies and aggressive marketing versus conservatism in embracing tradition. Herein, we review the literature to compare RRP to RARP in terms of perioperative, oncologic, and quality-of-life outcomes as well as healthcare costs. This is a particularly relevant, given the absence of randomized trials and long-term (more than 10-year) follow-up for RARP biochemical recurrence-free survival.

Localised prostate cancer: clinical and cost-effectiveness of new and emerging technologies

In contrast to pharmacological interventions that undergo rigorous clinical testing, recent technological advances in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) have particularly been introduced and driven by economic incentives rather than high-quality clinical evidence. In this review we summarise the clinical and cost-effectiveness of new and emerging technologies for localised PCa. We emphasise particularly on robotic prostatectomy, new developments in radiotherapy, novel technologies in focal therapy such as cryosurgery and high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU). Robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) has similar oncologic outcomes to open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP); however, patients who undergo RALRP are more likely to have improved short-term potency rates. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and proton-beam therapy (PBT) have similar oncologic outcomes to external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT). IMRT has exhibited an improved gastrointestinal side effect profile compared to EBRT. PBT is not cost-effective compared to other radiotherapy modalities. Early studies of focal therapies in localised PCa have yielded positive results. Treatment decisions should be driven by cancer risk and patient preference rather than by financial incentives or availability of technology.

Anesthetic considerations for robotic cystectomy: a prospective study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Robotic cystectomy is rapidly becoming a part of the standard surgical repertoire for the treatment of prostate cancer. Our aim was to describe respiratory and hemodynamic challenges and the complications observed in robotic cystectomy patients.

PATIENTS

Sixteen patients who underwent robotic surgery between December 2009 and January 2011 were prospectively enrolled. Main outcome measures were non-invasive monitoring, invasive monitoring and blood gas analysis performed at supine (T0), Trendelenburg (T1), Trendelenburg+pneumoperitoneum (T2), Trendelenburg-before desufflation (T3), Trendelenburg (after desufflation) (T4), and supine (T5) positions.

RESULTS

There were significant differences between T0-T1 and T0-T2 with lower heart rates. The mean arterial pressure value at T1 was significantly lower than T0. The central venous pressure value was significantly higher at T1, T2, T3, and T4 than at T0. There was no significant difference in the PET-CO2 value at any time point compared with T0. There were no significant differences in respiratory rate at any time point compared with T0. The mean f values at T3, T4, and T5 were significantly higher than T0. The mean minute ventilation at T4 and T5 were significantly higher than at T0. The mean plateau pressures and peak pressures at T1, T2, T3, T4, and T5 were significantly higher than the mean value at T0.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the majority of patients generally tolerate robotic cystectomy well and appreciate the benefits, anesthesiologists must consider the changes in the cardiopulmonary system that occur when patients are placed in Trendelenburg position, and when pneumoperitoneum is created.

[Comparison of initial results with robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open retropubic radical prostatectomy]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the superiority in 2 radical prostatectomies, we compared the initial results of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) to those of retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) performed during the same period at Nagakubo hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study was conducted on a total of 160 patients having undergone radical prostatectomy from April 2009 to March 2012 (92 patients with RARP and 68 with RRP). We investigated surgical stress, cancer control, functional outcomes and complications in both groups.

RESULTS

Surgical stress; operation time was significantly shorter with RRP; however, blood loss and serum total protein loss were significantly less with RARP. White blood cell count at 2 days after surgery was significantly less with RARP. The rates of analgesic use and SIRS were similar. Although the date on which taking solid meals resumed did not differ, the duration of indwelling urethral catheter and admission period were significantly shorter with RARP. Cancer control; the rates of positive surgical margin were 27.2% and 19.1% with RARP and RRP, respectively (p = 0.24), and biochemical recurrence was seen in 12.0% and 19.1% with RARP and RRP, respectively (p = 0.73), which were not significantly different. Continence; urinary continence outcomes with RARP and RRP were 17% and 4% for urinary continence at discharge (p = 0.01), 1.8 and 3.3 months for no more than one pad per day (p < 0.01), and 4.3 and 6.2 months for pad free (p = 0.03), respectively. Sexual function; erection recovery within 6 mo was only observed with RARP; however, overall recovery rate of erection was 65% and 75% with RARP and RRP, respectively (p = 0.69).

COMPLICATIONS

1 case with a rectal injury was seen in both groups, but complication rates were 8.7% and 16.2% with RARP and RRP, respectively (p = 0.22).

CONCLUSION

In spite of our initial experience of RARP, surgical stress and complications with RARP were considered to be superior to that with RRP. Cancer control and sexual function showed no significant difference between RARP and RRP, however, urinary continence outcome is significantly superior with RARP. Our data suggest that treatment outcome after initial experience with RARP is not inferior to that with RRP, and better results are expected by improving surgical techniques.

Does changeover by an experienced open prostatic surgeon from open retropubic to robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy mean a step forward or backward?

We assessed whether changeover from open retropubic [RRP] to robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy [RALP] means a step forward or backward for the initial RALP patients. Therefore the first 105 RALPs of an experienced open prostatic surgeon and robotic novice—with tutoring in the initial 25 cases—were compared to the most recent 105 RRPs of the same surgeon. The groups were comparable with respect to patient characteristics and postoperative tumor characteristics (all P > 0.09). The only disadvantage of RALP was a longer operating time; the advantages were lower estimated blood loss, fewer anastomotic leakages, earlier catheter removal, shorter hospital stay (all P < 0.04), and less major complications within 90 days postoperatively (P < 0.01). Positive surgical margin rates were comparable both overall and stratified for pT stage in both groups (all P < 0.08). In addition, an equivalent number of lymph nodes were removed (P > 0.07). Twelve months after surgery, patient reported continence and erectile function were comparably good (all P > 0.11). Our study indicates that an experienced open prostatic surgeon and robotic novice who switches to RALP can achieve favorable surgical results despite the initial RALP learning curve. At the same time neither oncological nor functional outcomes are compromised.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy compared with open and laparoscopic approaches: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Medline and Embase were searched for studies comparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with open prostatectomy and conventional laparoscopic prostatectomy. Random effects meta-analysis was used to calculate a pooled estimate of effect. The 95% prediction intervals are also reported. One randomized study and 50 observational studies were identified. The results show that compared with open surgery, robot-assisted surgery is associated with fewer positive surgical margins for pT2 tumors (relative risk 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.49-0.81, P < 0.001) and improved outcomes for sexual function at 12 months (relative risk 1.60, 95% confidence interval 1.33-1.93, P = <0.001), and, to a lesser extent, urinary function at 12 months (relative risk 1.06, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.11, P < 0.01). Compared with conventional laparoscopic prostatectomy, robot-assisted surgery is associated with a slight increase in urinary function at 12 months (relative risk 1.09, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.17, P = 0.013). The overall methodological quality of the included studies was low, with high levels of heterogeneity. The use of prediction intervals as an aid to decision making in regard to the introduction of this technology is examined. Clinically significant improvements in positive surgical margins rates for pT2 tumors and sexual function at 12 months associated with robot-assisted surgery in comparison with open surgery should be interpreted with caution given the limitations of the evidence. Differences between robot-assisted and conventional laparoscopic surgery are minimal.

Direct-to-consumer Internet promotion of robotic prostatectomy exhibits varying quality of information

Robotic surgery to remove a cancerous prostate has become a popular treatment. Internet marketing of this surgery provides an intriguing case study of direct-to-consumer promotions of medical devices, which are more loosely regulated than pharmaceutical promotions. We investigated whether the claims made in online promotions of robotic prostatectomy were consistent with evidence from comparative effectiveness studies. After performing a search and cross-sectional analysis of websites that mentioned the procedure, we found that many sites claimed benefits that were unsupported by evidence and that 42 percent of the sites failed to mention risks. Most sites were published by hospitals and physicians, which the public may regard as more objective than pages published by manufacturers. Unbalanced information may inappropriately raise patients' expectations. Increasing enforcement and regulation of online promotions may be beyond the capabilities of federal authorities. Thus, the most feasible solution may be for the government and medical societies to promote the production of balanced educational material.

Blood transfusions in radical prostatectomy: a contemporary population-based analysis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the homologous blood transfusion (HBT), autologous blood transfusion (ABT) and intraoperative blood conservation technique (IOBCT) rates and trends at open (ORP) and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (MIRP).

METHODS

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was queried. Multivariable logistic regression models focused on all three transfusion types. Covariables consisted of procedure specific annual hospital caseload (AHC), year of surgery, age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and region.

RESULTS

Overall, 119,966 patients underwent radical prostatectomy between 1998 and 2007. The HBT, ABT, and IOBCT rates were 6.2%, 6.0%, and 1.2%, respectively. HBT rates ranged from 5.1-5.1% between 1998 and 2007 (P=.49) vs 9.4-2.7% (P<.001) for ABT vs 1.9-0.9% (P=.003) for IOBCT in the same time period, respectively. In multivariable analyses, ORP patients treated at intermediate (odds ratio [OR] 1.48, P=.003) and low (OR 2.73, P<.001) AHC institutions were more likely to receive an HBT than ORP patients treated at high AHC institutions. Conversely, MIRP patients treated at high (OR 0.46, P=.040), intermediate (OR 0.27, P=.001), and low (OR 0.59, P=.015) AHC institutions were less likely to receive an HBT than ORP patients treated at high AHC institutions.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the overall transfusion rate at radical prostatectomy decreased within the last decade because of a substantial decline in ABT use. Moreover, MIRP protects from HBT, even when performed at low AHC Centers.

Strategies to reduce the use of blood products: a US perspective

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To describe the recent developments in the strategies to reduce allogeneic blood transfusions with emphasis on the impact on clinical outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Concerns over the safety, efficacy, and supply of allogeneic blood continue to necessitate its judicious use as the standard of care. Patient blood management is emerging as a multidisciplinary, multimodality strategy to address anemia and decrease bleeding with the goal of reduced transfusions and improved patient outcomes. Common risk factors for transfusion include anemia, blood loss, and inappropriate transfusion decisions. Several approaches are available to mitigate these. Recent data continue to support the effectiveness of various hematinics, hemostatic agents and devices, as well as intermittent discontinuation of anticoagulant therapy. Use of autotransfusion techniques, particularly cell salvage, is the other strategy with accumulating data supporting its safety and efficacy. Finally, implementation of evidence-based transfusion guidelines will help to target allogeneic blood to those patients who are likely to benefit from it and thus reduce or eliminate unnecessary exposure to blood.

SUMMARY

Patient blood management is the timely use of safe and effective medical and surgical techniques designed to prevent anemia and decrease bleeding in an effort to improve patient outcome.

Intraoperative red blood cell salvage and autologous transfusion during open radical retropubic prostatectomy: a cost-benefit analysis

INTRODUCTION

Open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) has an average blood loss of over 1,000 ml. This has been reported even from high volume centres of excellence. We have looked at the clinical and financial benefits of using intraoperative cell salvage (ICS) as a method of reducing the autologous blood transfusion requirements for our RRP patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Group A comprised 25 consecutive patients who underwent RRP immediately prior to the acquisition of a cell saver machine. Group B consisted of the next 25 consecutive patients undergoing surgery using the Dideco Electa (Sorin Group, Italy) cell saver machine. Blood transfusion costs for both groups were calculated and compared.

RESULTS

The mean postoperative haemoglobin was similar in both groups (11.1 gm/dl in Group A and 11.4 gm/dl in Group B). All Group B patients received autologous blood (average 506 ml, range: 103-1,023 ml). In addition, 5 patients (20%) in Group B received a group total of 16 units (average 0.6 units) of homologous blood. For Group A the total cost of transfusing the 69 units of homologous blood was estimated as £9,315, based on a per blood unit cost of £135. This cost did not include consumables or nursing costs.

CONCLUSIONS

We found no evidence that autologous transfusions increased the risk of early biochemical relapse or of disease dissemination. ICS reduced our dependence on donated homologous blood.

Quality of evidence to compare outcomes of open and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has gained widespread acceptance in the treatment of prostate cancer. While it increasingly is becoming the surgical approach of choice in many centers, limited data exist directly comparing it to radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP). This review examines the evidence comparing RALP to RRP. The outcomes evaluated are arranged into perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes. Of the 21 publications meeting our selection criteria, Level II, III, and IV evidence were found in 9, 1, and 11 articles, respectively. Overall, RALP was associated with lower blood loss, transfusion rates, length of stay, and higher cost when compared to RRP. Definitive conclusions regarding complications and oncologic and functional outcomes are not yet possible, and will require longer-term follow-up and well-designed randomized controlled trials.

Impact of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) use on blood loss during robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

In addition to their lipid lowering effects, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) have been shown to exert antithrombotic effects through downregulation of the coagulation cascade. Because statin use is widespread, it is important to understand the impact of these drugs on blood loss (BL) during surgery. We studied the impact of statin use on BL during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and open radical prostatectomy (ORP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of a database approved by the Institutional Review Board for patients who underwent RARP or ORP at a single academic institution. Patients were categorized as statin-users or statin-naïve at the time of surgery. Patient demographic information was recorded as was perioperative data, including preoperative and postoperative hematocrit (Hct) value. BL was defined as % Hct change presurgery vs postsurgery. In addition, the outcome of ≥10% drop in Hct was studied. The t test and chi-square analysis were used to compare variables across statin use groups. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to identify factors that impacted BL.

RESULTS

From 1987 to 2010, 3578 patients underwent prostatectomy for prostate cancer (RARP=945 and ORP=2633). Of these, 676 men were identified as statin-users and 2902 as statin-naïve. Mean patient age was 60.2±7.0 years. Statin-users were found to be older (P<0.001), have lower mean preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels (P=0.002), and have higher pathologic Gleason sum scores (P<0.001). For ORP, statin use was associated with increased BL with Hct % change of 20.7% for users vs18.6% for nonusers, (P<0.001). For RARP, no significant change in Hct was seen with statin use with % changes of 12.6% and 12.5%, respectively (P=0.9). When controlling for age, Gleason sum, surgeon, date of surgery and PSA level, statin use was associated with increased BL (P=0.04).

CONCLUSION

Even when controlling for age, Gleason sum, surgeon, date of surgery, and PSA, statin use is associated with increased BL during RP. This information may impact preoperative planning and patient counseling for men who are taking statins while preparing for RP.

Contemporary radical prostatectomy

Purpose. Patients diagnosed with clinically localized prostate cancer have more surgical treatment options than in the past. This paper focuses on the procedures' oncological or functional outcomes and perioperative morbidities of radical retropubic prostatectomy, radical perineal prostatectomy, and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Materials and Methods. A MEDLINE/PubMed search of the literature on radical prostatectomy and other new management options was performed. Results. Compared to the open procedures, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy has no confirmed significant difference in most literatures besides less blood loss and blood transfusion. Nerve sparing is a safe means of preserving potency on well-selected patients undergoing radical prostatectomy. Positive surgical margin rates of radical prostatectomy affect the recurrence and survival of prostate cancer. The urinary and sexual function outcomes have been vastly improved. Neoadjuvant treatment only affects the rate of positive surgical margin. Adjuvant therapy can delay and reduce the risk of recurrence and improve the survival of the high risk prostate cancer. Conclusions. For the majority of patients with organ-confined prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy remains a most effective approach. Radical perineal prostatectomy remains a viable approach for patients with morbid obesity, prior pelvic surgery, or prior pelvic radiation. Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has become popular among surgeons but has not yet become the firmly established standard of care. Long-term data have confirmed the efficacy of radical retropubic prostatectomy with disease control rates and cancer-specific survival rates.