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

Quality of Life after Radical Prostatectomy: A Longitudinal Study

BACKGROUND

Men with prostate cancer who undergo radical prostatectomy experience a decrease in quality of life, often related to sexual disfunction and urinary incontinence. Knowing and measuring the impact of radical prostatectomy on the individual's social, emotional, and family quality of life could help to plan and develop an appropriate, patient-centred therapeutic approach.

AIM

In this study, we aimed to evaluate changes in quality of life of patients with prostate cancer before and after radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

A longitudinal, observational study of 114 participants was conducted using the method of test-retest. Quality of life before and after radical prostatectomy was measured through the following self-administered questionnaires: (1) The EORTC QLQ-C30 in its Spanish version was used to assess the generic quality of life the participants; (2) the EORTC QLQ-PR25 in its Spanish version was used to assess the specific, health-related quality of life of prostate cancer patients.

RESULTS

A total of 114 men took part in this study. The results from the QLQ-C30 questionnaire indicated an improvement in the dimensions of emotional role and cognitive function, as well as in the symptoms of fatigue, pain, nausea and vomiting, insomnia, and loss of appetite, after surgery. Patients scored lower in the dimensions of role functioning, social function, and economic impact after radical prostatectomy. According to the results from the QLQ-PR25 questionnaire, 61.40% of the participants experienced sexual impotence and 26.31% suffered urinary incontinence after surgery. There were significant differences in some postsurgical outcomes between patients who had neurovascular bundles preserved and those who had not.

CONCLUSIONS

In-depth knowledge of, and measurement of changes in, quality of life after radical prostatectomy should allow for comprehensive, multidisciplinary, patient-centred care planning. Psychosocial assessment, both before and after surgery, is crucial in patients with prostate cancer. This study was prospectively registered with the CEIC-A on 2012-06-27, with registration number C.P.-C.I. PI12/0088.

Posterior musculofascial reconstruction in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer

BACKGROUND

Delayed recovery of urinary continence is a major adverse effect of robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) in men undergoing prostate cancer treatment. To address this issue, a number of surgical techniques have been designed to reconstruct the posterior aspect of the rhabdosphincter, which is responsible for urinary continence after removal of the prostate; however, it is unclear how well they work.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of posterior musculofascial reconstruction RALP compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, trials registries, other sources of the grey literature, and conference proceedings, up to 12 March 2021. We applied no restrictions on publication language or status.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in which participants were randomized to undergo variations of posterior musculofascial reconstruction RALP versus no posterior reconstruction during RALP for clinically localized prostate cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently classified studies and abstracted data from the included studies. Primary outcomes were: urinary continence recovery within one week after catheter removal, at three months after surgery, and serious adverse events. Secondary outcomes were: urinary continence recovery at six and twelve months after surgery, potency recovery twelve months after surgery, positive surgical margins (PSM), and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BCRFS). We performed statistical analyses using a random-effects model. We rated the certainty of evidence (CoE) according to the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search identified 13 records of eight unique RCTs, of which six were published studies and two were abstract proceedings. We included 1085 randomized participants, of whom 963 completed the trials (88.8%). All participants had either cT1c or cT2 or cT3a disease, with a mean prostate-specific antigen level of 8.15 ng/mL. Primary outcomes Posterior reconstruction RALP (PR-RALP) may improve urinary continence one week after catheter removal compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (risk ratio (RR) 1.25, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.73; I² = 42%; studies = 5, participants = 498; low CoE) although the CI also includes the possibility of no effect. Assuming 335 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 84 more men per 1000 (33 fewer to 244 more) reporting urinary continence recovery.  Posterior reconstruction may have little to no effect on urinary continence three months after surgery compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.14; I² = 67%; studies = 6, participants = 842; low CoE). Assuming 701 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 14 fewer men per 1000 (112 fewer to 98 more) reporting urinary continence after three months. PR-RALP probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.92; I² = 0%; studies = 6, participants = 835; moderate CoE). Assuming 25 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP experience a serious adverse event at this time point, this corresponds to six fewer men per 1000 (17 fewer to 23 more) reporting serious adverse events.  Secondary outcomes PR-RALP may result in little to no difference in recovery of continence 12 months after surgery compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.07; I² = 25%; studies = 3, participants = 602; low CoE). Assuming 918 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are continent at this time point, this corresponds to 18 more men per 1000 (18 fewer to 64 more) reporting urinary continence recovery.  We are very uncertain about the effects of PR-RALP on recovery of potency 12 months after surgery compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.26; I² = 3%; studies = 2, participants = 308; very low CoE). Assuming 433 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP are potent at this time point, this corresponds to nine more men per 1000 (78 fewer to 113 more) reporting potency recovery.  PR-RALP may result in little to no difference in positive surgical margins compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.33; I² = 50%; studies = 3, participants = 517; low CoE). Assuming 130 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP have a positive surgical margin, this corresponds to 31 more men per 1000 (46 fewer to 173 more) reporting positive surgical margins.  PR-RALP may result in little to no difference in biochemical recurrence compared to no posterior reconstruction during RALP (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.52; I² = 0%; studies = 2, participants = 468; low CoE). Assuming 70 per 1000 men undergoing standard RALP have experienced biochemical recurrence at this time point, this corresponds to 25 more men per 1000 (18 fewer to 107 more) reporting biochemical recurrence.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review found evidence that PR-RALP may improve early continence one week after catheter removal but not thereafter. Meanwhile, adverse event rates are probably not impacted and surgical margins rates are likely similar. This review was unable to determine if or how these findings may be impacted by the person's age, nerve-sparing status, or clinical stage. Study limitations, imprecision, and inconsistency lowered the certainty of evidence for the outcomes assessed.

Anatomical, surgical and technical factors influencing continence after radical prostatectomy

Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the most frequent treatment with curative intent performed for prostate cancer to date. Different surgical approaches (perineal, transperitoneal, and extraperitoneal) and techniques (laparoscopic and robot assisted) have been described to increase the efficiency and potentially diminish the postoperative complications of this procedure. The aim of this narrative review is to investigate and define the factors that influence postprostatectomy urinary continence. We highlighted the anatomical landmarks and the modifications of surgical techniques aimed at improving the continence rates and thus, patient quality of life. After RP, the long-term continence rates range from 84% to 97%. In order to achieve good continence rates, a careful dissection along with meticulous anatomical reconstruction is required. To this end, a detailed knowledge of the periprostatic anatomy is mandatory.

Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in 2018: 20 years of worldwide experiences, experimentations, researches and refinements

INTRODUCTION

After the first feasibility report in 1997, a growing interest has risen in the urologic community for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and several authors have contributed to the evolution of the technique. We attempt a review of the available evidences and provide a broad framework of different technical refinements considering their impact on pentafecta.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

The PubMed/Medline database was searched. Duplicates and "Expert opinion" papers were removed. Studies were included according to the aim of the present paper to present a selected review on LRP and report our personal experience.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

In 1999 Guillonneau et al. codified their transperitoneal-posterior-antegrade technique for LRP. Since then, several modifications of the transperitoneal approach were published and the extraperitoneal route was also proposed. Sparing the bladder neck and reconstructing the posterior muscolofascial plate were proven to improve continence rate. Nerve-sparing LRP were performed in order to maximize postoperative recovery of the sexual function. Novel techniques to ligate the Santorini plexus and sew the urethrovesical anastomosis provided improvement in operative time, intraoperative blood loss and reduced the incidence of postoperative urinary-leakages. In the recent years, the single-site approach as pushed the limits of LRP and three-dimensional (3D) systems for endoscopic surgery were developed.

CONCLUSIONS

Thanks to several technical improvements, LRP provides brilliant oncologic and functional outcomes and it is now considered the treatment of choice in many institutions worldwide. Although it is a technically demanding procedure, the recent introduction of 3D systems will reduce the steepness of its learning curve.

Pelvic Floor Reconstruction After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Different Surgical Techniques

Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the gold standard for the treatment of localized PCa. A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of different techniques of pelvic floor reconstruction on urinary continence. A comprehensive search was made for trials that evaluated the efficacy of pelvic floor reconstruction. Relevant databases included PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Ovid, Web of Science databases and relevant trials from the references. Random-effects model was used to estimate risk ratios (RRs) statistics. Pooled results of patients treated with posterior reconstruction (PR) demonstrated complete urinary continence improved at 1-4, 28-42, 90, 180 and 360 days following catheter removal. Anterior suspension (AS) was associated with improvement only at 28-42 days. The anterior reconstruction (AR) + PR was associated with urinary continence at 1-4, 90 and 180 days. AS + PR was not associated with any benefit. And PR improved social urinary continence at 7-14 and 28-42 days. No benefit was associated with AS. AR + PR had better outcomes at 90 and 180 days. AS + PR was significant improved at 28-42 and 90 days. Patients who underwent RP and PR had the least urinary incontinence. No significant benefit was observed after AS. AR + PR and AS + PR had little benefit in the post-operative period.

Effects of sertraline on executive function and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer

Background

The aim of this study was to investigate effects of the antidepressant sertraline on executive function and quality of life in patients with advanced cancer.

Material/Methods

We assigned 122 patients with stage III or IV cancer to the depressed group (DG, n=86) or the non-depressed group (NG, n=36). All subjects were given supportive treatment and patients in the DG received additional antidepressant treatment.

Results

There were significant differences in total scores of the Hamilton anxiety scale (HAMA) and the Hamilton depression scale (HAMD), performance in the Wisconsin card sorting test, and SF-36 domains. After antidepressant treatment, the level of depression and anxiety decreased significantly in the DG, but was still significantly higher than in the NG. Low executive function was enhanced in the DG, but a worsening executive function was found in total errors in the NG (−2.3±3.8) (P<0.05). The dimensions of SF-36 in physical functioning (PF), role limitations-physical (RP), bodily pain (BP), general health (GH), vitality (VT), social functioning (SF), role limitations-emotional (RE), and mental health (MH) were decreased significantly at baseline in the DG compared to the NG (P<0.01). After 12-week Sertraline treatment, improvement in the DG in factors VT, SF, RE, and MH were more powerful than in the NG (P<0.05). HAMA, HAMD, and VAS scores and tumor stage were significantly correlated to any one dimension of quality of life.

Conclusions

Depression is an important cause of decreased quality of life and executive function in patients with advanced cancer. The antidepressant sertraline can improve the executive function and quality of life, which may be helpful in the clinical practice of cancer treatment.