The surgical learning curve for salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective single-surgeon study

Outcomes of salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients who had primary focal versus whole-gland ablation: a multicentric study

In the present study, we present comparative outcomes of radical prostatectomy after whole-gland therapy (wg-SRARP) and focal gland therapy (f-SRARP). The study assessed 339 patients who underwent salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SRARP); 145 patients who had primary focal therapy and 194 patients who had primary whole-gland treatment. SRARP was performed in all cases using a standardized technique developed at respective institutes with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System. Our primary endpoint was the comparison of the functional and oncological outcomes between the groups. Cox proportional hazard was used to study the functional and oncological outcomes. The median total operative time for f-SRARP was 18 min higher than wg-RARP (p < 0.001). Higher rates of nerve-sparing were performed in f-SRARP (focal vs whole gland; bilateral-15.2% vs 9.3%; unilateral 49% vs 28.4%; p < 0.001). wg-SRARP had higher rates of ISUP 5 (26.3% vs 19.3%; p < 0.001) and deferred ISUP score due to altered pathology (14.8% vs 0.7; p < 0.001), while f-SRARP had higher rates of ISUP 4 (11.7% vs 10.7%; p < 0.001) and ≥ pT3a (64.8% vs 51.6%; p < 0.001). Positive margins were significantly higher with f-SRARP (26.2% vs 10.3%; p < 0.001). Functional outcomes were poor in both the groups. However, postoperative continence was higher and faster in patients who had f-SRARP compared to wg-SRARP (69% vs. 54.6%; p = 0.013). We could not identify statistically significant difference in postoperative potency recovery and biochemical recurrence. We present the largest multi-institutional analyses of f-SRARP and wg-SRARP. SRARP is challenging wherein patients have adverse pathological features and increased surgical complexity irrespective of the primary treatment. Focal therapy group had higher rates of nerve-sparing, however, with increased positive surgical margins. Both groups had poor functional outcomes regardless of nerve-sparing degree, indicating significant ipsilateral and contralateral damage to tissues surrounding the prostate during primary treatment. We believe that this analysis is crucial for counseling patients regarding expected outcomes before performing a salvage treatment following ablative therapy failure.

Outcomes of Salvage Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy in the last decade: systematic review and perspectives of referral centers

PURPOSE

Salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (S-RARP) has gained prominence in recent years for treating patients with cancer recurrence following non-surgical treatments of Prostate Cancer. We conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate the role and outcomes of S-RARP over the past decade.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted, encompassing articles published between January 1st, 2013, and June 1st, 2023, on S-RARP outcomes. Articles were screened according to PRISMA guidelines, resulting in 33 selected studies. Data were extracted, including patient demographics, operative times, complications, functional outcomes, and oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Among 1,630 patients from 33 studies, radiotherapy was the most common primary treatment (42%). Operative times ranged from 110 to 303 minutes, with estimated blood loss between 50 to 745 mL. Intraoperative complications occurred in 0 to 9% of cases, while postoperative complications ranged from 0 to 90% (Clavien 1-5). Continence rates varied (from 0 to 100%), and potency rates ranged from 0 to 66.7%. Positive surgical margins were reported up to 65.6%, and biochemical recurrence ranged from 0 to 57%.

CONCLUSION

Salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with cancer recurrence after previous prostate cancer treatment is safe and feasible. The literature is based on retrospective studies with inherent limitations describing low rates of intraoperative complications and small blood loss. However, potency and continence rates are largely reduced compared to the primary RARP series, despite the type of the primary treatment. Better-designed studies to assess the long-term outcomes and individually specify each primary therapy impact on the salvage treatment are still needed. Future articles should be more specific and provide more details regarding the previous therapies and S-RARP surgical techniques.

Salvage Radical Prostatectomy for Recurrent Prostate Cancer After Primary Nonsurgical Treatment: An Updated Systematic Review

Salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) has historically been associated with high morbidity, whilst recently published multicentre series suggested a trend towards improved outcomes. Hence, we performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses criteria to investigate the oncological and functional results and morbidity of sRP. We included 20 retrospective articles comprising 4175 men. Robotic procedures were performed in 40% and nerve sparing in up to 36% of men. Postoperative continence was preserved in 40.4% of patients and erectile function in <16%. High-grade complications were described in 6.6% of patients (rectal injuries 0.9%). At final sRP pathology, surgical margins were positive in 26.1%, 32.8% had seminal vesicle invasion, and International Society of Urological Pathology grade was >3 in 26.6%. Ten-year metastasis-free survival ranged from 72% to 77% and 5-yr cancer-specific survival ranged from 86.6% to 97.7%. Salvage radical prostatectomy shows durable oncological control and morbidity improved over recent years, despite remaining significant compared to and higher than that of primary radical prostatectomy. PATIENT SUMMARY: Salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) shows improving oncological control and morbidity over time. The complications associated with sRP and its functional results seem to be acceptable and are continuously improving.

Nightmares in Salvage Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy After Primary Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer: A Step by Step Tutorial

Salvage radical prostatectomy after primary radiotherapy (sRP) is considered a challenging procedure. We highlight the complications of sRP and detail critical surgical steps to help prevent them. A nonsystematic literature review in PubMed using the term “salvage radical prostatectomy” was performed on December 1, 2021. Salvage robot-assisted RP (sRARP) cases and imaging materials were used to create an educational video providing practical examples. Owing to radiation-induced changes in the prostate and surrounding tissues after radiotherapy, sRP is typically more challenging than primary RP. Among its critical steps are incision of the endopelvic fascia, bladder neck dissection with attempts at sparing the neck, development of posterior planes between the prostate and rectum, and dissection of the prostatic apex. Complication rates are significant, in particular for bladder neck contracture (0–16%) and anastomotic leakage (10–33%). Rectal injury is now rare (<2%) but still feared; careful adherence to surgical principles is required to avoid this complication. Functional outcomes are nonoptimal, with a high risk of urinary incontinence (severe incontinence in ∼25% of men). sRARP is a challenging urological procedure and should be performed by experienced surgeons. Thorough knowledge of the surgical anatomy and a meticulous technique for the most difficult surgical steps are crucial to minimise complications and to improve patient outcomes.

Patient summary

In patients with prostate cancer, removal of the prostate because of cancer recurrence after primary treatment with radiotherapy can be difficult because of radiation-induced tissue damage. This challenging procedure should be performed by experienced surgeons to minimise the risk of complications.

Learning curves in laparoscopic and robot-assisted prostate surgery: a systematic search and review

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic search and review of the available literature on the learning curves (LCs) in laparoscopic and robot-assisted prostate surgery.

METHODS

Medline was systematically searched from 1946 to January 2021 to detect all studies in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement, reporting on the LC in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP), robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RSP).

RESULTS

In total, 47 studies were included for qualitative synthesis evaluating a single technique (LRP, RARP, LSP, RSP; 45 studies) or two techniques (LRP and RARP; 2 studies). All studies evaluated outcomes on real patients. RARP was the most widely investigated technique (30 studies), followed by LRP (17 studies), LSP (1 study), and RSP (1 study). In LRP, the reported LC based on operative time; estimated blood loss; length of hospital stay; positive surgical margin; biochemical recurrence; overall complication rate; and urinary continence rate ranged 40-250, 80-250, 58-200, 50-350, 110-350, 55-250, 70-350 cases, respectively. In RARP, the corresponding ranges were 16-300, 20-300, 25-200, 50-400, 40-100, 20-250, 30-200, while LC for potency rates was 80-90 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The definition of LC for laparoscopic and robot-assisted prostate surgery is not well defined with various metrics used among studies. Nevertheless, LCs appear to be steep and continuous. Implementation of training programs/standardization of the techniques is necessary to improve outcomes.