Salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: oncologic and functional outcomes from two high-volume institutions.

INTRODUCTION: While no consensus on the optimal salvage treatment exists, only 3% of these patients will get salvage radical prostatectomies due to the assumed technical challenges of this procedure. OBJECTIVES: Our goal is to analyze the perioperative, oncologic and functional outcomes of patients undergoing salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (sRARP) after primary treatment failure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed from a combined database of more than 14,800 patients who had undergone RARP. We identified 96 patients who underwent sRARP after RT or ablative techniques. Primary cancer characteristics, surgical data, pathology results, perioperative complications, oncologic and functional outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (70.8%) received some source of RT as a primary treatment. The remaining 28 patients: 18 (18.75%) received cryotherapy, seven (7.92%) HIFU, one electroporation, one microwave and one Tookad. complication was seen in 25 (26%) patients (21 minor and 4 major complications). Anastomotic leak was the most common complication, found in 14 (14.6%) of the cases. No rectal injuries occurred. Fourteen (15%) patients had a biochemical failure after a median follow-up of 14 (IQR 5-24) months. Fifty-five (57.3%) of them self-reported to be pad-free at 12 months. Seventeen (55%) of 31 pre-operative potent patients (SHIM score > 21), were potent with or without the use of PDE5i at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: sRARP is a feasible alternative for PCa recurrence. Technically the procedure is challenging and should be performed by experienced PCa surgeons. Major complications are uncommon. Continence and potency recovery is possible, but at lower rates than for non-salvage patients.

Nerve-sparing in salvage robot-assisted prostatectomy: surgical technique, oncological and functional outcomes at a single high-volume institution.

OBJECTIVE: To show the feasibility, oncological and functional outcomes of neurovascular bundle (NVB) preservation during salvage robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In the present institutional review board-approved retrospective analysis, between January 2008 and March 2016, 80 patients underwent salvage RARP, performed by a single surgeon (V.P), because of local recurrence after primary treatment. These patients were categorized into two groups depending on the degree of nerve-sparing (NS) performed: a good-NS group (≥50% of NVB preservation) and a poor-NS group (<50% of NVB preservation). A standard transperitoneal six-port technique, using the DaVinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA), was performed, and either an anterograde or a retrograde approach was used for NVB preservation. Validated questionnaires were used preoperatively (Sexual Health Inventory for Men [SHIM] and American Urological Association scores). Potency after salvage RARP was defined as the ability to achieve a successful erection with penetration >50% of the time, while full continence after salvage RARPwas defined as 0 pads used. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival and predictive estimations, and regression models were used to identify the predictors of potency, continence and biochemical failure (BCF). RESULTS: The potency rate at 12 months was higher in the good-NS group (25.6% vs 4.3%; P = 0.036) regardless of previous SHIM score, and good NS tended to be predictive of potency after salvage RARP (P = 0.065). The full continence rate at 12 months and BCF rate were similar in the two groups, and non-radiation primary treatment was the only predictor of continence at 12 months after salvage RARP (P = 0.033). CONCLUSIONS: Our data support the feasibility and safety of NVB preservation for salvage RARP conducted in select patients in a high-volume institution and the subsequent better recovery of adequate erections for intercourse.

Safety of Live Robotic Surgery: Results from a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: Live surgery events (LSEs) have become one of the most attended activities at surgical meetings and provide a unique opportunity for the audience to observe the decision-making process used by skilled and experienced surgeons in real time. However, there is an ongoing discussion on whether patients treated during LSE are at higher risk of complications. OBJECTIVE: To examine LSE outcomes for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and establish patient safety and efficacy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From January 2008 to April 2016, >9000 patients underwent RARP at our institution, performed by a single surgeon. From this group, 36 patients underwent live RARP surgery (LS group) transmitted via video link from our institution to an external congress. A control group was obtained from our database to compare outcomes between the LS group and patients undergoing RARP under regular circumstances. The data were prospectively collected in a customized database and retrospectively analyzed. INTERVENTION: All patients underwent RARP performed by a single surgeon at our institution. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Postoperative outcomes were compared between the LS (n=36) and the control (n=108) groups using Student's t test and analysis of variance for continuous variables, and a two-tailed Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics (age, body mass index, comorbidities, preoperative Gleason score, Sexual Health Inventory for Men score and American Urological Association symptom score) between the groups. The median console time was shorter for the LS group (73min, interquartile range [IQR] 70-79) than for the control group (78min, IQR 75-87; p=0.0371). No major complications were reported in either group, and only four minor complications were observed in the control group (p=0.2415). After median follow-up of 31 mo (IQR 18-50), only one patient (2.77%) in the LS group experienced biochemical recurrence, compared to four (3.71%) in the control group (p=0.7927). There was no significant difference in continence rates between the LS and control groups (97.22% vs 93.52%; p=0.7768). No differences in potency rate were evident by the end of the follow-up period (LS 69.44%, control group 70.37%; p=0.8432). The retrospective nature, the lack of randomization, and the single-institution experience are limitations of the study. CONCLUSIONS: In this series of live transmitted RARPs, perioperative results (oncological and functional outcomes and complications) were similar to those found in daily practice. After careful patient selection, LSEs are safe with minimal patient morbidity in the hands of an experienced surgeon working with a familiar surgical team. Further evaluation of the results from other surgeons at other centers is necessary. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated the safety of surgeries broadcast live from our institution. We found that outcomes were similar to those for patients undergoing surgery under regular circumstances in terms of the rate of complications and oncological and functional outcomes. We conclude that live transmitted surgery is safe in well-selected patients in the hands of an experienced surgeon.

Robotic radical prostatectomy with concomitant repair of inguinal hernia: is it safe?

Robotic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is well established as a safe and effective treatment for prostate cancer. According to published studies, patients undergoing RARP are at increased risk of being diagnosed with an inguinal hernia after RARP and are four times more likely to have an inguinal hernia repair (IHR) following RARP. Several studies have demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of IHR during RARP. Overall, it has been observed that IHR adds on average, 12-15 min in total surgical time and there were no significant differences between RARP with or without IHR with respect to postoperative complications. This study analyzes a large series of patients undergoing RARP (1100) and compares them to a group that underwent RARP with IHR (39). Between December 2008 and January 2015, 1139 patients underwent RARP at Florida Hospital in Celebration, FL. Of the total patients, 39 underwent concomitant IHR. All procedures were performed by the same surgeons (urologist and general surgeon), using the same techniques of RARP and TAPP inguinal hernia repair. After 30 days, the differences were evaluated between groups regarding surgical time, EBL and postoperative complications. The average age of patients undergoing the procedure was 61.65 years. The mean procedure time was approximately 120 min (min), with an additional period of 68 min for IHR (mean = 188; p = 0.0001). There was a significant difference in BMI between the groups, 28.3 kg/m2 for patients undergoing RARP and 26.8 kg/m2 for those who underwent RARP and IHR (p = 0.028). The EBL averaged 110.87 mL, with no significant difference between groups (p = 0371). There was no significant association between clinical stage of the patient and the type of procedure performed (p = 12:35). There was no significant difference in the presence of comorbidities and the operation preformed. There were 61 events recorded postoperatively, 57 (5.2%) among patients who underwent only RARP and 4 (10.26%) among those who had both. Taken together, the small amounts of complications in both groups prevent statistical significance. This study compared two groups of patients undergoing RARP: those with IHR and those without. Our study demonstrated an increase in surgical time; however, there was no increase in postoperative complications. From the data presented, we suggest that the performance of both procedures concomitantly is feasible and safe.

Can dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane accelerate the return to potency after a nerve-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy? Propensity score-matched analysis.

The objective of this study is to determine if the use of dehydrated human amnion/chorion membrane (dHACM) allograft wrapped around the NVB during a robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) accelerates the return to potency. 940 patients with preoperative SHIM >20 underwent RARP with some degree of bilateral NS. Of these, 235 patients underwent RARP, with bilateral placement of dHACM graft around the NVBs. They were matched in a 1:3 proportion with a similar group of patients (n = 705) who did not receive the allograft (control group or group 2). Minimum follow-up was 12 months. Postoperative outcomes were analyzed between propensity-matched dHACM graft (group 1) and non-graft groups (group 2). Kaplan-Meier survival curves were compared across techniques using the log-rank test. There were no significant demographic differences between the two groups. Potency was defined as the ability to achieve and maintain satisfactory erections firm enough for sexual intercourse, with or without the use of PDE-5 inhibitors. The mean time to potency was significantly lower in group 1 (2.37 months) versus group 2 (3.94 months) (p < 0.0001). The potency recovery rates were superior for group 1 at all early time points measured except at 12 months. The time to potency was significantly shorter in the dHACM group with full NS, 2.19 ± 1.84 versus 2.78 ± 2.70 mo. in the non-dHACM with full NS (p = 0.029). In the dHACM group with partial NS, the mean time to potency was 3.05 ± 2.32 versus 3.92 ± 3.42 mo. in the non-dHACM with partial NS (p = 0.021). Patients who received the dHACM wrap around the NVB after RARP accelerates the return to potency when compared to a similar control group without the use of the allograft. We also demonstrated that this faster return to potency occurs regardless of the degree of the NS preservation. Younger patients (<55 years of age) had the highest overall advantage if they received the graft. Our results indicate that dHACM placement at the site of the prostatic NVB does not increase the risk of BCR after RARP, neither in the presence of PSM, extra-prostatic disease (≥pT3) nor high Gleason score (Gleason ≥8).