Multiquadrant Combined Robotic Radical Prostatectomy And Left Partial Nephrectomy: A Combined procedure by A Single Approach

INTRODUCTION

To present the first case of a concomitant robotic radical prostatectomy and a left robotic partial nephrectomy performed by a single-port approach using the SP® da Vinci surgical system (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale CA, EE.UU.).

PATIENT AND METHODS

A 66-year-old male diagnosed with localized prostate cancer and a left kidney renal mass incidentally found on computed tomography (CT) scan during prostate cancer evaluation. Procedures were performed using a single supra-umbilical 3cm incision, plus one additional laparoscopic port, utilizing a standard Gelpoint® (Applied Medical, Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, EE.UU.) and replicating the technique previously described for single-port transperitoneal radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy with the use of the SP® robotic platform.

RESULTS

Total operative time was 256minutes (min) with a console time of 108min for radical prostatectomy, and 101min for the partial nephrectomy respectively, including a warm ischemia time of 26min. Estimated blood loss was 250cc. Blood transfusion was not needed. Final pathology for prostate was adenocarcinoma Gleason 7 (4+3) and for the kidney lesion was renal cell carcinoma. After two months of follow-up, PSA was undetectable and no complications or recurrence were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The single-port approach has advantages as easier surgical planning and transition for combined and multi-quadrants surgeries: faster recovery, minimal postoperative pain and need for opioids, and excellent cosmetic outcome. We suggest that combined procedures should be performed only in high volume institutions by surgeons with vast experience in robotic surgery in selected patients.

Evaluation of antifungal therapy in patients with candidaemia based on susceptibility testing results: implications for antimicrobial stewardship programmes

BACKGROUND

Definitive antifungal therapy is typically based on Candida species and clinical status, rather than susceptibility reports. Antifungal susceptibility testing is available, but the impact on treatment decisions is unknown. The purpose of this study was to assess antifungal therapy in hospitalized patients with candidaemia during the time period between the start of empirical therapy and after antifungal susceptibility testing reports are available.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 161 hospitalized patients with candidaemia was conducted. Patients who received fluconazole or an echinocandin were evaluated for changes in empirical antifungal therapy prior to and after susceptibility reporting.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-one patients aged 59 ± 16 years (male, 54%; Caucasian, 52%; APACHE II score ≥ 15, 48%; and intensive care unit, 50%) were identified, of whom 130 (81%) had fluconazole-susceptible candidaemia. Fifty-eight patients (36%) were initiated on fluconazole and 103 (64%) on an echinocandin. The mean time from culture to the susceptibility report was 5 ± 2 days. Prior to availability of the susceptibility report, 20 fluconazole-initiated patients (34%) were switched to an echinocandin, while 14 echinocandin-initiated patients (14%) were switched to fluconazole. Once a susceptibility report was available, 35 of 89 (39%) patients with fluconazole-susceptible candidaemia on an echinocandin were de-escalated to fluconazole. Eleven patients on fluconazole just prior to a susceptibility report were identified with a fluconazole-resistant Candida species.

CONCLUSIONS

Using antifungal susceptibility testing, patients given fluconazole with fluconazole-resistant Candida species were identified. Less than 40% of echinocandin-treated patients with fluconazole-susceptible organisms were de-escalated to fluconazole. Antifungal susceptibility testing may help to identify patients in need of clinical intervention.