Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: functional and early oncologic results in aggressive and locally advanced prostate cancer

Association between 3D membranous urethral parameters and urinary continence recovery after RARP

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether the urinary continence (UC) recovery after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) relates to the membranous urethral length (MUL) and the membranous urethral complex volume (MUV).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

120 patients who underwent RARP were enrolled according to the different times of UC recovery and examined using prostate magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) before surgery. The membranous urethral (MU) parameters were measured using the three-Dimensional (3D) model reconstructed by holographic technology, such as total MUV (tMUV), exposed MUV (eMUV), full MUL (fMUL) and exposed MUL (eMUL). Statistical software SPSS 26.0 was used to analyze the data and compare the MU parameters and baseline data in different groups.

RESULTS

Patients with larger tMUV (p = 0.038), eMUV (p = 0.003), longer fMUL (p = 0.025), eMUL (p = 0.044) had better UC after removal of the catheter, and eMUV (OR = 1.002, 95%CI = 1.001-1.004, p = 0.004) was a predictor; the patients with younger age (p = 0.021), lower VPSS score (p = 0.004) and larger eMUV (p = 0.012) and longer eMUL (p = 0.049) had better UC recovery one month after RARP while eMUV (OR = 1.002, 95% CI = 1.000-1.003, p = 0.008) and VPSS score (OR = 0.886, 95% CI = 0.806-0.973, p = 0.011) were independent risk factors; The patients with younger age (p = 0.018), larger tMUV (p = 0.029), eMUV (p = 0.016) had better UC recovery three months after RARP. eMUV (OR = 1.002, 95% CI = 1.000-1.004, p = 0.042) and age (OR = 0.904, 95% CI = 0.818-0.998, p = 0.046) were independent risk factors.

CONCLUSION

This clinical study shows that patients with larger MUV and longer MUL can return to UC earlier after surgery. Among that, eMUV is a better predictor.

Retzius-Sparing Robotic-Assisted Prostatectomy: Technical Challenges for Surgeons and Key Prospective Refinements

Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is the gold standard for localized prostate cancer. Several RARP approaches were developed and described over the years, aimed at improving oncological and functional outcomes. In 2010, Galfano et al described a new RARP technique, known as Retzius-sparing RARP (RS-RARP), a posterior approach through the Douglas space that spares the anterior support structures involved with urinary continence and sexual potency. This approach has been used increasingly in many centers around the world comparing its results with those of the most used standard anterior approach. Several randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrated an important advantage relative to standard anterior RARP in terms of early urinary continence recovery, with comparable perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes. Several surgeons are concerned regarding RS-RARP because it appears to increase the risk of positive surgical margins (PSMs). However, this statement is based on low-certainty evidence. Indeed, the available studies compared the results of surgeons who had an initial experience with posterior RARP with those who had a solid experience with anterior RARP. Recent evidence strongly suggests that RS-RARP is feasible and safe not only in low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer patient but also in challenging scenario such as high-risk setting, salvage prostatectomy and after transurethral resection of the prostate.

Research progress on surgical factors related to early urinary control after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Radical resection of prostate cancer is the first choice for the treatment of early localized prostate cancer, but urinary incontinence is prone to occur after the operation, especially early urinary incontinence, which seriously affects the quality of life of patients. This article discusses the surgical methods, approaches, and techniques to clarify the effects of surgical-related factors on early postoperative urinary control, in order to provide the best treatment for patients with prostate cancer.

Transition from standard robotic prostatectomy to Retzius-sparing prostatectomy: feasibility and early outcomes

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Retzius-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (rsRARP) has gained popularity due to superior early continence outcomes compared to standard robotic prostatectomy (sRARP). We evaluate the results of a single surgeon who transitioned from sRARP to rsRARP and compare oncologic and functional outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all prostatectomies performed by a single surgeon between June 2018 and October 2020. Perioperative, oncologic, and functional data were collected and analyzed. Patients who underwent sRARP were compared with those who underwent rsRARP.

RESULTS

Both groups contained 37 consecutive patients each. Preoperative patient characteristics and biopsy results were similar between the two groups. Perioperative outcomes were significant for longer operative room time and higher proportion of T3 tumors in the rsRARP group. Thirty-day complication and readmission rates were similar between groups. There was no difference in early oncologic outcomes, including positive surgical margin rate, biochemical recurrence, and need for adjuvant or salvage treatments. The time to urinary continence and immediate continence rate was superior in the rsRARP group.

CONCLUSIONS

The Retzius-sparing approach can be safely adopted by surgeons experienced in sRARP without compromising early oncologic outcomes and with the benefit of improved early continence recovery.

Urinary continence recovery after Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in relation to surgeon experience

Urinary incontinence is one of the main concerns for patients after radical prostatectomy. Differences in surgical experience among surgeons could partly explain the wide range of frequencies observed. Our aim was to evaluate the association between the surgeons` experience and center caseload with relation to urinary continence recovery after Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP). Prospective observational single-center study. Five surgeons consecutively operated 405 patients between July 2017 and February 2022. Continence recovery was evaluated with pad count and by employing the short form of the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ-SF), pre- and postoperatively at 1 year. Non-parametric tests were used. Median age was 63 years, 30% of patients presented with local advanced disease; the positive surgical margin rate (over 3 mm length) was 16%. Complication rate was 1% (Clavien-Dindo > II). One year after surgery, continence was assessed in 282 patients, of whom 87% were pad free and 51% never leaked (ICIQ-SF = 0). With respect to the mean annual number of procedures per surgeon, divided in < 20, 20-39 and ≥ 40, pad-free rates were achieved in 93%, 85%, and 84% and absence of urine leak rates in 47%, 62% and 48% of patients, respectively. Postoperative median ICIQ-SF was five. We acknowledge the limitation of a 12-month follow-up and the fact that we are a medium-volume center. There is no statistically significant association between continence recovery, surgeon's experience and center caseload. Continence recovery at 1 year after surgery is adequate and robust to surgeon's experience.

A retrospective study to evaluate the effect of preoperative hormonal therapy on continence recovery

Objective

To evaluate whether different preoperative hormonal therapy options affect postoperative continence and to identify risk/protective factors for continence recovery.

Methods

This is a retrospective analysis of several clinical trials (NCT04356430, NCT04869371, NCT04992026 and NCT05406999). Data from patients treated with hormonal therapy followed by RARP were collected and analyzed. Continence was defined as 0 pad/day or one safety pad.

Results

The study included 230 patients with adequate information. The median time to continence recovery is 8 weeks. A total of 216 (93.9%) participants recovered to urinary continence within 12 months after surgery. 21 (9.1%) participants achieved immediate continence. 69, 85, 27 and 14 participants restored continence at 1 month, 1-3 month, 3-6 month, 6-12 month, accounting for 30.0%, 40.0%, 11.7% and 6.1% accordingly. No difference in continence recovery was found among different preoperative hormonal treatment options (p=0.821). Cox regression showed that membranous urethral length (MUL) was the only independent factor influencing urinary continence recovery either in the univariate analysis (OR=1.13, 95%CI: 1.04-1.22, p=0.002) or in the multivariate analysis (OR=1.12, 95%CI: 1.04-1.20, p=0.002). Different preoperative treatment options were not associated with urinary recovery. More advanced preoperative T stage (OR=0.46, 95%CI: 0.24-0.85, p=0.014) delayed the recovery of immediate continence. MUL was associated with continence restoring at 1 month (OR=1.20, 95%CI: 1.03-1.39, p=0.017), 3 month (OR=1.27, 95%CI: 1.07-1.51, p=0.006), 6 month (OR=1.34, 95%CI: 1.07-1.67, p=0.011) and 12 month (OR=1.36, 95%CI: 1.01-1.84, p=0.044).

Conclusion

There is no difference in postoperative continence recovery among ADT, ADT+Docetaxel and ADT+Abiraterone preoperative treatment options. More advanced T stage indicated poor immediate continence recovery. Longer membranous urethral length was a promotional factor for both short-time and long-time continence recovery.

Comparison of single-port and multi-port Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy

Dissemination of robotic surgical technology for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has yielded advancements including the Retzius-sparing (RS) approach and the single-port (SP) platform. The safety and feasibility of each individual advancement have been evaluated, yet there is a lack of literature comparing SP RS-RALP to conventional multi-port (MP) RS-RALP. All patients who underwent RS-RALP at our institution between January 2019 and February 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Data regarding baseline patient and tumor characteristics, operative characteristics, and surgical outcomes were collected and analyzed using the Fisher's exact test and two-tailed unpaired t tests. 62 patients were evaluated: 31 received SP RS-RALP and 31 received MP RS-RALP. Differences in patient age, BMI, and initial PSA were not observed. Lower median lymph node yield (SP: 4 vs MP: 12, p < 0.01), lower estimated blood loss (SP: 111.2 vs. MP 157.8 mL, p < 0.01), shorter operative time (SP: 207.7 vs. MP: 255.9 min, p < 0.01) and decreased length of stay (SP: 0.39 vs. MP: 1.23 days, p < 0.01) were observed in the SP RS-RALP cohort. No differences in positive surgical margins, complications, or biochemical recurrence rates were observed. SP RS-RALP is non-inferior to MP RS-RALP in terms of both perioperative and early oncologic outcomes. Despite the small sample size, the SP platform is a safe and feasible option for RS-RALP and confers potential benefits in the form of shorter operative time and reduced length of stay.

Contemporary seminal vesicle invasion rates in NCCN high-risk prostate cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Contemporary seminal vesicle invasion (SVI) rates in National Cancer Comprehensive Network (NCCN) high-risk prostate cancer (PCa) patients are not well known but essential for treatment planning. We examined SVI rates according to individual patient characteristics for purpose of treatment planning.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Within Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2010-2015), 4975 NCCN high-risk patients were identified. In the development cohort (SEER geographic region of residence: South, North-East, Mid-West, n = 2456), we fitted a multivariable logistic regression model predicting SVI. Its accuracy, calibration, and decision curve analyses (DCAs) were then tested versus previous models within the external validation cohort (SEER geographic region of residence: West, n = 2519).

RESULTS

Out of 4975 patients, 28% had SVI. SVI rate ranged from 8% to 89% according to clinical T stage, prostate-specific antigen (PSA), biopsy Gleason Grade Group and percentage of positive biopsy cores. In the development cohort, these variables were independent predictors of SVI. In the external validation cohort, the current model achieved 77.6% accuracy vs 73.7% for Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Centre (MSKCC) vs 68.6% for Gallina et al. Calibration was better than for the two alternatives: departures from ideal predictions were 6.0% for the current model vs 9.8% for MSKCC vs 38.5% for Gallina et al. In DCAs, the current model outperformed both alternatives. Finally, different nomogram cutoffs allowed to discriminate between low versus high SVI risk patients.

CONCLUSIONS

More than a quarter of NCCN high-risk PCa patients harbored SVI. Since SVI positivity rate varies from 8% to 89%, the currently developed model offers a valuable approach to distinguish between low and high SVI risk patients.

Retzius-sparing Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy in High-risk Prostate Cancer Patients: Results from a Large Single-institution Series

Background

Retzius-sparing (RS) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy represents a valid surgical treatment option for prostate cancer (PCa) patients. However, the available evidence on the role of RS in high-risk (HR) PCa setting is sparse.

Objective

To describe our RS technique for HR-PCa patients and to evaluate intra-, peri-, and postoperative oncological and functional outcomes.

Design, setting, and participants

A total of 340 D’Amico HR-PCa patients underwent RS at a single high-volume centre between 2011 and 2020.

Surgical procedure

Surgical procedures were performed by five experienced robotic surgeons.

Measurements

Complications were collected according to the standardised methodology proposed by the European Association of Urology guidelines. Postoperative outcomes were evaluated in patients with complete follow-up data (n = 320). Biochemical recurrence (BCR) was defined as two consecutive prostate-specific antigen values of ≥0.2 ng/ml. Urinary continence (UC) recovery was defined as the use of zero or one safety pad. Kaplan-Meier and multivariable logistic and Cox regression models were performed.

Results and limitations

Fourteen patients (4%) experienced intraoperative complications and 52 90-d complications occurred in 44 patients (14%), of whom 24 had Clavien-Dindo 3a/b. Final pathology reported 49% International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade 4–5, 55% ≥pT3a, and 28.8% positive surgical margins (PSMs; 9.4% focal and 19.4% extended PSMs). The median follow-up was 47 mo. Overall, 35.3% and 1.3% harboured BCR and died from PCa. At 4 yr of follow-up, BCR-free survival and additional treatment-free survival were 63.6% and 56.6%, respectively. ISUP 4–5 at biopsy (odds ratio [OR]: 2.6), prostate volume (OR: 1.03), partial or full nerve sparing (OR: 1.9), and full bladder neck preservation (OR: 2.2) were independent predictors of PSMs. Pathological ISUP 4–5 (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.5) and PSMs (HR: 2.3) were independent predictors of BCR. Pathological ISUP 4–5 (HR: 1.5), PSMs (HR: 2.4), pT ≥3b (HR: 1.8), and pN ≥1 (HR: 1.8) were independent predictors of additional treatment. Immediate UC recovery was recorded in 53% patients. The 1- and 2-yr UC recovery and erectile function recovery were, respectively, 84% and 85%, and 43% and 50%.

Conclusions

RS in HR-PCa patients allows optimal intra-, peri-, and postoperative outcomes. The RS approach should be considered a valid surgical treatment option for HR-PCa patients in expert hands.

Patient summary

Relying on the largest cohort of high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with Retzius sparing (RS), we observed that the RS approach is safe and allows optimal cancer control, without significantly compromising functional outcomes.

Different Nerve-Sparing Techniques during Radical Prostatectomy and Their Impact on Functional Outcomes

Simple Summary

Optimum preservation of potency and continence after radical prostatectomy (RP) are equally important surgical endpoints as cancer control itself. Nerve-sparing technique during RP has a major impact to both oncological and functional outcomes of the procedure and various different techniques have been developed aiming to optimize its outcomes. This literature review aims to summarize all different nerve-sparing techniques applied during RP from its first description from Patrick C. Walsh to its newer trends. The review underlines that optimum nerve-sparing expands far beyond recognising and preserving the anatomical integrity of the neurovascular bundles. It also emphasises that nerve-sparing is a field under constant development, with new technologies entering continuously the nerve-sparing field corresponding to the evolving open, laparoscopic and robotic-assisted RP approaches.

Abstract

The purpose of this narrative review is to describe the different nerve-sparing techniques applied during radical prostatectomy and document their functional impact on postoperative outcomes. We performed a PubMed search of the literature using the keywords “nerve-sparing”, “techniques”, “prostatectomy” and “outcomes”. Other potentially eligible studies were retrieved using the reference list of the included studies. Nerve-sparing techniques can be distinguished based on the fascial planes of dissection (intrafascial, interfascial or extrafascial), the direction of dissection (retrograde or antegrade), the timing of the neurovascular bundle dissection off the prostate (early vs. late release), the use of cautery, the application of traction and the number of the neurovascular bundles which are preserved. Despite this rough categorisation, many techniques have been developed which cannot be integrated in one of the categories described above. Moreover, emerging technologies have entered the nerve-sparing field, making its future even more promising. Bilateral nerve-sparing of maximal extent, athermal dissection of the neurovascular bundles with avoidance of traction and utilization of the correct planes remain the basic principles for achieving optimum functional outcomes. Given that potency and continence outcomes after radical prostatectomy are multifactorial endpoints in addition to the difficulty in their postoperative assessment and the well-documented discrepancy existing in their definition, safe conclusions about the superiority of one technique over the other cannot be easily drawn. Further studies, comparing the different nerve-sparing techniques, are necessary.

Efficacy and safety of single port robotic radical prostatectomy and multiport robotic radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of single port (SP) robot radical prostatectomy and multiport (MP) robot radical prostatectomy.

Methods

Using the China National Knowledge database, EMBASE, Cochrane library, PubMed, and other databases to obtain relevant research, SP robot radical prostatectomy and MP robot radical prostatectomy were comprehensively evaluated. The software used to evaluate the impact of the results in the selected articles was Review Manager 5.2. Deviation analysis, forest plot analysis, and sensitivity analysis were carried out for the collected data.

Results

A total of 7 related studies that met the criteria were finally included. The data showed that the operation time of MP in the control group was significantly longer than that in the SP group [mean difference (MD) =−13.29; 95% confidence interval (CI): (−17.35, −9.23); P<0.00001; I²=50%]. The duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay for SP surgery was shorter than that for MP surgery [MD =−18.30; 95% CI: (−29.17, −7.42); P=0.0010; I²=94%]. The blood loss of SP surgery was less than that of MP surgery [MD =−15.54; 95% CI: (−28.37, −2.71); the total effective rate was 0.02; I²=0%]. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between SP and MP surgery [risk ratio (RR) =0.95; 95% CI: (0.55, 1.63); P=0.85; I²=0%]. At the same time, the sensitivity analysis and funnel plot showed that this study was robust and publication bias was limited.

Discussion

Our results show that SP robotic radical prostatectomy is superior to MP robotic radical prostatectomy in terms of efficacy and safety. SP robot radical prostatectomy is worthy of wide promotion.

Systematic review comparing Anterior vs Retzius-sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: can the approach really make a difference?

INTRODUCTION

Retzius-Sparing Robotic Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RS-RARP) is a novel surgical approach to radical prostatectomy. Its pioneers have suggested an improved recovery of urinary continence, while maintaining adequate cancer control. Aim of this systematic review is to explore available data on RS-RALP and compare functional, oncologic and perioperative results of RS-RARP compared to anterior RARP.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A search following PRISMA guidelines was performed including the combination of the following words: retzius AND sparing AND radical AND prostatectomy. 93 articles were identified and 13 were included in the systematic review, including 3 randomized controlled trials (RCT), 4 prospective studies and 6 retrospective studies.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

All available randomized trials confirmed an improved immediate continence for RS-RARP, with rates ranging 51-71%, compared to 21-48% for anterior RARP. However, this advantage was progressively lost with no significant difference found after 6 months. Moreover, a prospective study found no discrepancy in terms of quality of life across the two techniques. Erectile function was difficult to compare, as patients had different baseline erectile function across studies and rate of neurovascular preservation was not comparable. Surgical approach remains controversial regarding positive margin rate, although related to the surgeon's experience and clinical stage. Biochemical recurrence-free survival appears similar between the two approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

RS-RARP improves early urinary continence recovery compared to anterior RARP, with this advantage being lost after 3 to 6 months. Erectile function and quality of life were however comparable between the two techniques. The results concerning the rate of positive margins remained controversial. Future studies with longer follow-up are needed to better assess oncologic outcomes.

How to Prevent and Manage Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: A Review

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of the currently available evidence relating to the prevention and management strategies of urinary incontinence (UI) after radical prostatectomy (RP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive research was carried out on MEDLINE/PubMed database to identify pertinent studies concerning post-RP UI. The search strategy included these words: urinary continence; urinary continence recovery; urinary incontinence; radical prostatectomy; and prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Post-RP UI still represents a challenging issue for both urologic patients and clinicians. A complete preoperative assessment of the risk factors associated with post-RP UI aids both in counseling those patients with a higher estimated likelihood of postoperative UI and in identifying those who would probably benefit from preventive strategies in the preoperative and in the intraoperative settings. Over the last decades different surgical strategies based on either the "preservation" or the "reconstruction" of the anatomical elements responsible for urinary continence (UC) led to an overall improvement of postoperative functional outcomes. Finally, several therapeutic strategies should be evaluated for the postoperative UI management. Artificial urinary sphincter implantation represents the gold standard for treatment, notwithstanding its wide adoption is limited due to high costs and significant risk of surgical revision. In this context, male sling positioning seems the most promising strategy, in particular in mild and moderate post-RP UI.

CONCLUSIONS

To enhance the likelihood of obtaining an optimal UC recovery after RP, it is here strongly suggested to intervene throughout the overall clinical management process thus including the pre-, intra- and postoperative settings.

The impact of transition from conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy to retzius sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: A retrospective multivariate analysis

Introduction:

To assess the outcomes of Retzius sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) in comparison with the conventional RARP.

Materials and Methods:

A retrospective analysis of 320 cases of RARP, performed from 2014 April to 2019 April, was performed. The predictor variables included age, body mass index, clinical stage, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score category in biopsy, D'Amico risk category, presence of the median lobe, prior transurethral resection of the prostate, and the ability to perform the RS-RARP. The outcome variables included console time, blood loss, blood transfusion, nerve sparing, bladder neck sparing, positive surgical margins (PSM), number and the site of PSMs, extracapsular invasion, seminal vesicle involvement, complications, continence, erectile function, biochemical recurrence, and adjuvant treatment. Regression analysis was performed using the linear regression for the continuous variables and binary logistic regression for the categorical variables with two levels.

Results:

Three hundred and twenty patients underwent radical prostatectomy from 2014 April to 2019 April. We started the RS-RARP program in December 2016. Twenty-three patients who did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded and a total of 297 patients were studied. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that RS-RARP was a strong positive independent predictor for continence recovery at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. RS-RARP was an independent predictor of reduced console time and increased probability of bladder neck sparing. RS-RARP was also independently associated with increased PSM in the posterolateral, anterolateral, and the apical regions.

Conclusion:

RS-RARP has better continence rates up to 12 months compared with the conventional approach, but is associated with increased PSM at certain locations.

Complex space of Retzius lymphocele resulting in iliac compression and submassive pulmonary embolism after robotic Retzius sparing prostatectomy

Lymphoceles are common following prostatectomy with lymph node dissection, but the vast majority are asymptomatic. We present a unique case of a large complex lymphocele tracking into the anterior space of Retzius following Retzius sparing prostatectomy and bilateral pelvic lymphadenectomy. The patient initially presented with shortness of breath and subsequent diagnosis of a submassive pulmonary embolism. Further evaluation revealed compression of the iliac vessels by the fluid collection. Following multiple failed attempts of drainage percutaneously, the patient required return to the operating room for peritoneal marsupialization, drainage of fluid collection, and evacuation of large amounts of clot within the collection.

Comprehensive approach for preserving cavernous nerves and erectile function after radical prostatectomy in the era of robotic surgery

A nerve-sparing procedure during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy has been considered one of the most important techniques for preserving postoperative genitourinary function. The reason is that adequate nerve-sparing procedures could preserve both erectile function and lower urinary tract function after surgery. When a nerve-sparing procedure is carried out, the cavernous nerves themselves cannot be visualized, despite the magnified viewing field during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Thus, nerve-sparing procedures have been considered challenging operations, even now. However, because not all surgeons have carried out a sufficient number of nerve-sparing procedures, the development of new nerve-sparing procedures or new methods for mapping the cavernous nerves is required. Recently, various new operative techniques, for example, Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, transvesical robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and retrograde release of neurovascular bundle technique during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy, have been developed. In addition, new surgical devices, for example, biological/bioengineering solutions for cavernous nerve protection and devices for identifying the cavernous nerves during radical prostatectomy, have developed to preserve the cavernous nerves. In contrast, limitations or problems in preserving cavernous nerves and postoperative erectile function have become apparent. In particular, the recovery rate of erectile function, the positive surgical margin rate at the site of nerve-sparing and the indications for nerve sparing have become obvious with the accumulation of much evidence. Furthermore, predictive factors for postoperative erectile function after nerve-sparing procedures have also been clarified. In this article, the importance of a comprehensive approach for early recovery of erectile function in the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy era is discussed.

A systematic review of nerve-sparing surgery for high-risk prostate cancer

INTRODUCTION

We provide a systematic analysis of nerve-sparing surgery (NSS) to assess and summarize the risks and benefits of NSS in high-risk prostate cancer (PCa).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We have undertaken a systematic search of original articles using 3 databases: Medline/PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Original articles in English containing outcomes of nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP) for high-risk PCa were included. The primary outcomes were oncological results: the rate of positive surgical margins and biochemical relapse. The secondary outcomes were functional results: erectile function (EF) and urinary continence.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The rate of positive surgical margins differed considerably, from zero to 47%. The majority of authors found no correlation between NSS and a positive surgical margin rate. The rate of biochemical relapse ranged from 9.3% to 61%. Most of the articles lacked data on odds ratio (OR) for positive margin and biochemical relapse. The presented results showed no effect of nerve sparing (NS) on positive margin (OR=0.81, 0.6-1.09) or biochemical relapse (hazard ratio [HR]=0.93, 0.52-1.64). A strong association between NSS and potency rate was observed. Without NSS, between 0% and 42% of patients were potent, with unilateral 79-80%, with bilateral - up to 90-100%. Urinary continence was not strongly associated with NSS and was relatively good in both patients with and without NSS.

CONCLUSIONS

NSS may provide benefits for patients with urinary continence and significantly improves EF in high-risk patients. Moreover, it is not associated with an increased risk of relapse in short- and middle-term follow-up. However, the advantages of using such a surgical technique are unclear.

Early Experience with Salvage Retzius-sparing Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Oncologic and Functional Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To report on feasibility, safety, and continence outcomes using the Retzius-sparing approach in the salvage setting (sRS-RARP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 26 patients underwent robotic salvage prostatectomy at our institution from January 2012 to May 2020 by a single surgeon (RM). Twenty patients underwent sRS-RARP and 6 underwent the standard approach (sRARP). Pre-, intra-, and postoperative outcomes were compared between these groups with emphasis on continence and oncologic safety.

RESULTS

Patients had comparable preoperative characteristics with no significant difference in age, race, prostate-specific antigen level, and Gleason score. Most patients underwent primary external beam radiation therapy (69.2%). Median time to biochemical failure was 7.9 years (IQR 6.1-13.4). sRS-RARP required less console time (141.5 vs 199.5.0 minutes, P = .008) and less blood loss (50.0 mL vs 100.0 mL, P = .045) compared to sRARP. Postoperative course was uneventful with a median hospital stay of 1 day. Median catheterization time was 14.0 days (IQR 11.5-17). Patients undergoing sRS-RARP had better immediate (25.0% vs 0.0%, P < .001), 3 month (80.0% vs 0%, P < .001), and 12 month continence rates (100% vs 44%, P = .0384) compared to sRARP patients. Likewise, median time to continence was significantly shorter for sRS-RARP patients (90.0 vs 270.0 days, P = .0095). Biochemical recurrence rate was 20.0% in the sRS-RARP group and 33.3% in the sRARP group (P = .60).

CONCLUSION

Early experience suggests that sRS-RARP is feasible, oncologically safe, and may offer improved continence compared to the sRARP approach.

Retzius Sparing Prostatectomy Effect on Symptomatic Lymphocele Rates

OBJECTIVE

To compare symptomatic lymphocele rates between standard and Retzius sparing prostatectomy approaches.

METHODS

From September 18, 2019 to July 15, 2020, robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomies by 2 surgeons (1 using SP and other Xi) at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Symptomatic lymphoceles were diagnosed after the patient represented to the hospital with symptoms attributable to lymphocele and confirmed by abdominal CT scan. Statistical analysis was performed using R Studio (1.2).

RESULTS

There were 81 prostatectomies performed during the study period. Of these, 50 were Retzius sparing and 31 were standard approach. The 2 groups were similar in age, BMI, grade group, nerves spared, and T stage. Retzius sparing prostatectomies had higher lymph node yield and were more often performed with Xi multiport. Symptomatic lymphoceles were entirely present in the Retzius sparing group, occurring in 18% of cases at a mean time of 34 days after surgery. Retzius sparing approach was a significant predictor of lymphocele occurrence with an odds ratio of 23.77 (95% CI, 2-3725).

CONCLUSION

Retzius sparing prostatectomy was a significant predictor of symptomatic lymphoceles. Most of these cases required IR drainage and IV antibiotics as treatment. This is likely due to impairment of lymph reabsorption as the peritoneal lining remains approximated during Retzius sparing prostatectomy.

How to Prevent and Manage Post-Prostatectomy Incontinence: A Review

PURPOSE

To provide an overview of the currently available evidence relating to the prevention and management strategies of urinary incontinence (UI) after radical prostatectomy (RP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive research was carried out on MEDLINE/PubMed database to identify pertinent studies concerning post-RP UI. The search strategy included these words: urinary continence; urinary continence recovery; urinary incontinence; radical prostatectomy; and prostate cancer.

RESULTS

Post-RP UI still represents a challenging issue for both urologic patients and clinicians. A complete preoperative assessment of the risk factors associated with post-RP UI aids both in counseling those patients with a higher estimated likelihood of postoperative UI and in identifying those who would probably benefit from preventive strategies in the preoperative and in the intraoperative settings. Over the last decades different surgical strategies based on either the "preservation" or the "reconstruction" of the anatomical elements responsible for urinary continence (UC) led to an overall improvement of postoperative functional outcomes. Finally, several therapeutic strategies should be evaluated for the postoperative UI management. Artificial urinary sphincter implantation represents the gold standard for treatment, notwithstanding its wide adoption is limited due to high costs and significant risk of surgical revision. In this context, male sling positioning seems the most promising strategy, in particular in mild and moderate post-RP UI.

CONCLUSIONS

To enhance the likelihood of obtaining an optimal UC recovery after RP, it is here strongly suggested to intervene throughout the overall clinical management process thus including the pre-, intra- and postoperative settings.

Retzius-sparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: racial considerations for 250 consecutive cases

Our objective is to report the functional and oncologic outcomes of a cohort of 250 consecutive prostate cancer patients undergoing a Retzius-sparing approach and to assess for racial differences in continence outcomes. This was a prospective, single-center, case series of 250 consecutive prostate cancer patients who underwent a Retzius-sparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon between May 2015 and April 2019. Our primary objective was to report post-operative continence outcomes of patients undergoing this technique. Continence was defined as using zero or one precautionary pad per day. Median follow-up was 24.0 months [interquartile range (IQR) 18.0-30.0 months]. Median age and body mass index were 62.0 years (IQR 57.0-67.0) and 29.0 kg/m² (IQR 26.0-33.0), respectively. Median PSA was 8.22 ng/ml (IQR 5.74-13.31). 84.8% of patients were intermediate risk or high risk pre-operatively, as per AUA/ASTRO/SUO guidelines. 96.0% had Gleason Score 7 or worse disease on final pathologic analysis. Positive margin incidence was 18.1% and 44.4% in patients with pT2 and pT3 disease, respectively, of which 75.4% were unifocal. Immediate continence (i.e., continence achieved within 1 month post-operatively) was achieved in 45.2% of patients. Three-month and 1-year continence rates were 70.0% and 92.0%, respectively. Caucasian patients experienced earlier return of continence (77% versus 65% at 3 months) compared to African American patients. IPSS scores gradually improved from 8.0 pre-operatively to 4.0 1-year later. Median PSA level was 0.01 ng/ml (IQR 0.01-9.01) post-operatively. Retzius-sparing robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is an oncologically safe surgical technique with excellent short- and long-term continence outcomes. Caucasian patients may have earlier return of continence compared to African Americans.

Robotic-assisted surgery for the treatment of urologic cancers: recent advances

INTRODUCTION

As the medical field is moving toward personalized and tailored approaches, we entered the era of precision surgery for the management of genitourinary cancers1. This is facilitated by the implementation of new technologies, among which robotic surgery stands out for the significant impact in the surgical field over the last two decades.

AREAS COVERED

This article reviews the latest evidence on robotic surgery for the treatment of urologic cancers, including prostate, kidney, bladder, testis, and penile cancer. Functional and oncologic outcomes, new surgical techniques, new imaging modalities, and new robotic platforms are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Robotic surgery had a growing role in the management of genitourinary cancers over the past 10 years. Despite a lack of high-quality evidence comparing the effectiveness of robotic to open surgery, the robotic approach allowed a larger adoption of a minimally invasive surgical approach, translating into lower surgical morbidity and shorter hospital stay. New robotic platforms might allow to explore novel surgical approaches, and new technologies might facilitate surgical navigation and intraoperative identification of anatomical structures, allowing a more tailored and precise surgery. It is an exciting time for robotic surgery, and upcoming technological advances will offer better outcomes to urologic cancer patients.