The transrectal single port laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a cadaver model

Randomized clinical trial on the use of a colon-occlusion device to assist rectal washout

Background

Transrectal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery is currently limited by the inherent risk of surgical site infection due to peritoneal contamination after rectotomy. Coloshield has been developed as a temporary colon occlusion device to facilitate rectal washout. However, effectiveness and safety has not been evaluated in humans.

Methods

Twenty-two patients have been randomly assigned to undergo proctological intervention with a rectal washout with and without the use of Coloshield. Patients and assessors were blinded. Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) has been determined 30 min as well as immediately after rectal washout. Feasibility, pain, intra- and postoperative morbidity as well as bowel function and continence 6 weeks after surgery were assessed.

Results

BBPS 30 min after rectal washout with and without Coloshield was in mean 2.42 ± 1.02 and 2.12 ± 0.89 (p = 0.042). Mean BBPS immediately after rectal washout was 2.39 ± 1.02 and 2.24 ± 0.66 (p = 0.269). Mean BBPS immediately after rectal washout and 30 min thereafter did not differ (p = 0.711). Coloshield application was feasible without any complications. The median (interquartile range) numeric rating scale for pain 4 h after surgery was 1 (0–1) and 3 (0–4) (p = 0.212). Six weeks after surgery 0/11 and 1/11 patients suffered from evacuation difficulties (p = 1.0) and the median Vaizey–Wexner score was 1 (0–3) and 1 (0–2) (p = 0.360).

Conclusions

Coloshield application in humans is feasible and safe. Slight benefits in rectal preparation by washout are found when Coloshield is used. Colon occlusion by Coloshield for transrectal NOTES should be evaluated within clinical studies.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02579330

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.

Surgery beyond the visible light spectrum: theoretical and applied methods for localization of the male urethra during transanal total mesorectal excision

The risk of urethral injury during transanal total mesorectal excision (taTME) is delineated, and potential risk factors for iatrogenic transection are reviewed. A variety of applied and theoretical techniques can be used by surgeons to diminish the risk of injury in males undergoing this operation. Many of the approaches utilize non-optic media and wavelengths beyond the visible light spectrum which can enhance the surgeon's frame of reference. The aim of the present study was to assess the techniques and theoretical approaches to urethral localization during taTME. Future directions in surgical imaging are also discussed, including the use of organic dyes, quantum dots, and carbon nanotubes; collectively, technology that could someday provide surgeons with an ability to identify anatomic structures prone to injury.

Gastrointestinal tract access for urological natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery

We conducted a literature review of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), focusing on urologic procedures with gastrointestinal tract access, to update on the development of this novel surgical approach. As part of the methods, a comprehensive electronic literature search for NOTES was conducted using PubMed and Cochrane Library from March 2002 to February 2016 for papers reporting urologic procedures performed utilizing gastrointestinal tract access. A total of 11 peer-reviewed studies examining utility of gastrointestinal access for NOTES urologic procedures were noted, with the first report in 2007. The procedures reported in the studies were total/radical nephrectomy, partial nephrectomy, adrenalectomy, and prostatectomy. The transgastric approach was identified in five studies examining total/radical nephrectomy (n = 2), partial nephrectomy (n = 1), partial cystectomy (n = 1), and adrenalectomy (n = 1). Six studies evaluated transrectal approach for NOTES, describing total/radical nephrectomy (n = 3), partial nephrectomy (n = 1), robotic nephrectomy with adrenalectomy (n = 1) and prostatectomy (n = 1). Feasibility was reported in all studies. Most studies were preclinical and acute, and limited by concerns regarding restricted instrumentation and infection risk. We concluded that gastrointestinal access for urologic NOTES demonstrates promise as described by outlined feasibility studies in preclinical models. Nonetheless, clinical application awaits further advancements in surgical technology and concerns regarding infectious potential.