International consensus panel for transurethral resection of bladder tumours metrics: assessment of face and content validity.

OBJECTIVE: To develop performance metrics that objectively define a reference approach to a transurethral resection of bladder tumours (TURBT) procedure, seek consensus on the performance metrics from a group of international experts. METHODS: The characterisation of a reference approach to a TURBT procedure was performed by identifying phases and explicitly defined procedure events (i.e., steps, errors, and critical errors). An international panel of experienced urologists (i.e., Delphi panel) was then assembled to scrutinise the metrics using a modified Delphi process. Based on the panel's feedback, the proposed metrics could be edited, supplemented, or deleted. A voting process was conducted to establish the consensus level on the metrics. Consensus was defined as the panel majority (i.e., >80%) agreeing that the metric definitions were accurate and acceptable. The number of metric units before and after the Delphi meeting were presented. RESULTS: A core metrics group (i.e., characterisation group) deconstructed the TURBT procedure. The reference case was identified as an elective TURBT on a male patient, diagnosed after full diagnostic evaluation with three or fewer bladder tumours of ≤3 cm. The characterisation group identified six procedure phases, 60 procedure steps, 43 errors, and 40 critical errors. The metrics were presented to the Delphi panel which included 15 experts from six countries. After the Delphi, six procedure phases, 63 procedure steps, 47 errors, and 41 critical errors were identified. The Delphi panel achieved a 100% consensus. CONCLUSION: Performance metrics to characterise a reference approach to TURBT were developed and an international panel of experts reached 100% consensus on them. This consensus supports their face and content validity. The metrics can now be used for a proficiency-based progression training curriculum for TURBT.

Risks and Benefits of Live Surgical Broadcast: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Live surgical broadcast (LSB), also known as live surgery, has become a popular format for many types of surgical education meetings. However, concerns have been raised in relation to patient safety, ethical issues, and the actual educational value of LSB. OBJECTIVE: To summarize current evidence on LSB with a focus on the risks of complications and the educational impact. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a systematic review of the literature according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify studies up to December 2020. We identified original articles reporting on patient outcomes, educational value, current use, and development of LSB. We also interrogated surgical society guidelines for position statements on LSB. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our literature search identified 46 studies spanning six surgical specialties, with urology being the most frequent. Approximately half of the studies reported on outcomes of surgical procedures during LSB. In urology, the few comparative studies available did not suggest higher complication rates in LSB, whereas data for other surgical fields highlighted evidence of worse outcomes. Four studies assessed the educational value of LSB via survey administration, for which the evidence is limited and of low quality. Thirteen guidelines and position statements on live surgery were identified among major surgical societies, including the European Association of Urology (EAU). Some surgical societies have expressly prohibited the use of LSB at their major meetings. The perspective of surgeons performing and/or attending live surgical sessions was evaluated in six studies, and four studies looked at urologists' perception of LSB compared to semi-LSB. Limitations of this systematic review include the limited number of studies available, the low quality of the evidence, and data heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence regarding outcomes of LSB is limited. Almost all the studies do not show a higher risk of complications or worse outcomes for patients undergoing a procedure during LSB. Only one study on gastrointestinal surgery reported that LSB outcomes were worse. Ongoing concerns have led to specific guidelines by several scientific societies, including the EAU, with the ultimate aim of minimizing surgical risks and maximizing patient safety. PATIENT SUMMARY: Live surgery events are often part of surgical conferences. Data in the literature show mixed outcomes for operations performed during live surgery events, but with no increase in complication rates. Safety and ethical concerns remain. Other educational tools, such as prerecorded videos and live surgery transmission from the home institution of the operating surgeon might become preferred options in the future. This review was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO website (www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, registration number CRD42020194023).

Robotic-assisted surgery for the treatment of urologic cancers: recent advances.

INTRODUCTION: As the medical field is moving toward personalized and tailored approaches, we entered the era of precision surgery for the management of genitourinary cancers1. This is facilitated by the implementation of new technologies, among which robotic surgery stands out for the significant impact in the surgical field over the last two decades. AREAS COVERED: This article reviews the latest evidence on robotic surgery for the treatment of urologic cancers, including prostate, kidney, bladder, testis, and penile cancer. Functional and oncologic outcomes, new surgical techniques, new imaging modalities, and new robotic platforms are discussed. EXPERT OPINION: Robotic surgery had a growing role in the management of genitourinary cancers over the past 10 years. Despite a lack of high-quality evidence comparing the effectiveness of robotic to open surgery, the robotic approach allowed a larger adoption of a minimally invasive surgical approach, translating into lower surgical morbidity and shorter hospital stay. New robotic platforms might allow to explore novel surgical approaches, and new technologies might facilitate surgical navigation and intraoperative identification of anatomical structures, allowing a more tailored and precise surgery. It is an exciting time for robotic surgery, and upcoming technological advances will offer better outcomes to urologic cancer patients.

Extrafascial robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in locally advanced prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Up to 26.5% of new diagnosed prostate cancers (PCa) are locally advanced (LA). Although traditionally discouraged in this setting, radical prostatectomy (RP) lowers the risk of metastatic progression and cancer-specific death. We report a review of the available evidences and describe our surgical technique of extrafascial robot-assisted RP. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The PubMed/Medline database was searched for "prostate cancer," "high-risk," "locally advanced," "prostatectomy." Duplicates and expert opinion papers were removed. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: RP is an option in selected patients with LA-PCa and >10 years life expectancy. Five, 10 and 15 years after open RP, disease free survival rates were 85%, 73% and 67%. At the same time-points, cancer specific survival and overall survival were 95%, 90%, 79% and 90%, 76%, 53%, respectively. Postoperative potency was achieved by 25% of the patients while 79% were continent. Robotic prostatectomy provides comparable cancer control outcomes, but it is associated with a lower transfusion rate and a shorter hospitalization time. The concept of "extrafascial prostatectomy" was introduced in 2000 by Villers: this surgical approach reduces the incidence of mid- and postero-lateral positive margins (28% vs. 51%, when compared to intrafascial; P=0.08), expecially in pT3 cancers, but markedly affects potency. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted RP is an option in patients with LA-PCa. Removing the prostate gland and the seminal vesicles still contained inside their aponeurotic covering, minimize the risk of positive surgical margins and clinical recurrence.

Oligometastatic prostate cancer and salvage lymph node dissection: systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: We provide a comprehensive description of the physio-pathological theories behind oligometastatic prostate cancer (PCa) and analyze modern imaging techniques, presenting a systematic review of the available evidences regarding salvage lymph node dissection (sLND). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was attempted. The PubMed/Medline database was searched for "salvage" AND ("lymph node dissection" OR "lymphadenectomy") AND "prostate" AND "cancer." Only English publications were targeted. Relevant original articles addressing the role of sLND in PCa were selected. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Biochemical response (BR) was reported in 10-79.5% of the cases overall. These results were not durable and biochemical recurrence occurred in 54.5-93.8% of the cases, within 5 years. Furthermore, 50-80% of patients received some kind of adjuvant treatment right after sLND, regardless post-operative prostate-specific antigen levels. Surgery-related morbidity was low, with a 0-27% incidence of Clavien-Dindo III complications. No sLND-related deaths were observed. CONCLUSIONS: sLND is not associated with a durable response over time but may postpone HT and its related complications, in selected patients. Although a limited morbidity was reported, sLND remains technically demanding and a careful selection of patients is advisable.

Retrosigmoid Versus Traditional Ileal Conduit for Urinary Diversion After Radical Cystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Ureteroileal anastomotic stricture (UAS) after ileal conduit diversion occurs in a non-negligible proportion of patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). Surgical techniques aimed at preventing this potential complication are sought. OBJECTIVE: To describe our surgical technique of retrosigmoid ileal conduit, and to assess perioperative outcomes and postoperative complications with a focus on UAS rate. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective single-centre, single-surgeon cohort of 67 consecutive patients undergoing open RC with ileal conduit urinary diversion between July 2013 and April 2017 was analysed. A study group of 30 patients receiving retrosigmoid ileal conduit was compared with a control group of 37 patients receiving standard Wallace ileal conduit. SURGICAL PROCEDURE: Retrosigmoid versus Wallace ileal conduit diversion after open RC. MEASUREMENTS: Operative room (OR) time, estimated blood loss (EBL), transfusion rate, and 90-d postoperative complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. In particular, rate of UAS, defined as upper collecting system dilatation requiring endourological or surgical management, was assessed and compared. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: The two groups were comparable with regard to all demographic, clinical, and pathological variables. No differences were observed in terms of OR time (p=0.35), EBL (p=0.12), and transfusion rate (p=0.81). Ninety-day postoperative complications were observed in 11 (36.7%) patients who underwent a retrosigmoid ileal conduit and 20 (54.1%) patients who received a traditional ileal conduit (p=0.32). Major complications (grade 3-4) were observed in three (10%) cases in the former group and in 12 (32.4%) cases in the latter group (p=0.08). Mean (standard deviation) follow-up time was 10.8±4.0 mo in the study group and 27.5±9.5 mo in the control group (p<0.001). No single case of UAS was observed in the study group, whereas six (16.2%) cases of UAS occurred in the control group (p=0.02). The main limitation is a nonrandomised comparison of a relatively small cohort with short-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we observed a significantly reduced rate of UAS and no increase in postoperative complications with the retrosigmoid ileal conduit diversion compared with standard Wallace ileal conduit diversion after open RC. PATIENT SUMMARY: We describe our surgical technique of retrosigmoid ileal conduit as urinary diversion after open radical cystectomy. Compared with traditional techniques, our technique for ileal conduit was found to be safe and reduce the risk of ureteric strictures.

From "gold standard" resection to reproducible "future standard" endoscopic enucleation of the prostate: what we know about anatomical enucleation.

BACKGROUND: Open prostatectomy (OP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) have traditionally been the most common surgical approaches for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia causing bladder outlet obstruction and have certainly passed the test of time. In time, many endoscopic surgical procedures have been described as an alternative mini-invasive treatment. Holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) guaranteed functional outcomes similar to OP and TURP with lower perioperative complication rates for any prostate size. With the development of different kinds of lasers (such as thulium, "green light" and diode) and bipolar energy, the feasibility of endoscopic enucleation using these energies has been explored. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: In this paper, recent techniques to perform true prostate enucleation have been reviewed through a search of PubMed and Web of Science, including articles published in the last 20 years in clinical journals. The review is based on a peer-review process of the authors after a structured data search. Search terms included "Thulium prostate enucleation, THULEP, TmLEP/Tm Yag enucleation" OR "Greenlight enucleation/prostate enucleation/vapo-enucleation/KTP prostate enucleation, PVP prostate enucleation, GreenLep/" OR "bipolar prostate enucleation" OR "HoLEP, Holmium prostate enucleation" OR "monopolar prostate enucleation" OR "Diode prostate enucleation" OR "DiLEP" OR "Eraser prostate enucleation" OR "ELEP". EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Following the example of HoLEP, many techniques have been described in the literature using a variety of energy sources and instruments either in a pure enucleative or a hybrid (mixed) fashion. However, the levels of evidence are too low and follow-up still too short to offer solid recommendations. CONCLUSIONS: HoLEP has become the conceptual and practical paradigm for the wide spread of enucleation thanks to the evidence provided by the literature and excellent outcomes. Higher level of evidence is required to assess efficacy of alternative enucleative techniques.

Monopolar Transurethral Enucleation of Prostatic Adenoma: Preliminary Report.

OBJECTIVE: To describe preliminary results of our monopolar transurethral enucleation of prostatic adenoma (mTUEPA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A consecutive series of male patients treated with mTUEPA, a retrograde enucleation of the prostatic adenoma performed by means of a standard monopolar resectoscope, were prospectively enrolled. Symptoms, uroflowmetry parameters, and post-voiding residual were assessed at baseline and at 1, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Prostate volume was evaluated at baseline by means of transrectal ultrasound. Antiplatelet and anticoagulant drugs were stopped at least 1 week before the operation. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients were enrolled. Mean preoperative prostate volume was 64.9 ± 28.5 g. When assessed at baseline, the mean total International Prostatic Symptoms Score was 15.2 ± 3.9, peak flow rate (Qmax) was 8.4 ± 2.9 mL/s and the post-voiding residual was 103.2 ± 90.6 mL. Four weeks after surgery, patients reported a mean International Prostatic Symptoms Score of 5.3 ± 3. This lower urinary tract symptoms relief was further maintained at 6 and 12 months after surgery. A significant postoperative improvement in uroflowmetry parameters was described, being the 6 and 12 months mean Qmax of 23.4 ± 10.6 mL/s and 18.8 ± 9.2 mL/s, respectively (P < .001). Overall, 14 postoperative complications were reported by 13 of 47 (27.6%) patients: most of them were minor complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade I-II), whereas 1 patient reported capsule perforation during surgery, requiring interruption of the procedure and its further completion (Clavien-Dindo IIIb). CONCLUSION: mTUEPA is a safe and effective technique, merging the principles of laser enucleation and the advantages of mechanical enucleation with standard monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate equipment.

Robotic surgery in Italy national survey (2011).

Robotic surgery in Italy has become a clinical reality that is gaining increasing acceptance. As of 2011 after the United States, Italy together with Germany is the country with the largest number of active Robotic centers, 46, and da Vinci Robots installed, with at least 116 operators already trained. The number of interventions performed in Italy in 2011 exceeded 6,000 and in 2010 were 4,784, with prevalence for urology, general surgery and gynecology, however these interventions have also begun to be applied in other fields such as cervicofacial, cardiothoracic and pediatric surgery. In Italy Robotic centers are mostly located in Northern Italy, while in the South there are only a few centers, and four regions are lacking altogether. Of the 46 centers which were started in 1999, the vast majority is still operational and almost half handle over 200 cases a year. The quality of the work is also especially high with large diffusion of radical prostatectomy in urology and liver resection and colic in general surgery. The method is very well accepted among operators, over 80 %, and among patients, over 95 %. From the analysis of world literature and a survey carried out in Italy, Robotic surgery, which at the moment could be better defined as telesurgery, represents a significant advantage for operators and a consistent gain for the patient. However, it still has important limits such as high cost and non-structured training of operators.

The learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an international multicenter study.

PURPOSE: It is not yet possible to estimate the number of cases required for a beginner to become expert in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. We estimated the learning curve of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for positive surgical margins compared to a published learning curve for open radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed records from 8,544 consecutive patients with prostate cancer treated laparoscopically by 51 surgeons at 14 academic institutions in Europe and the United States. The probability of a positive surgical margin was calculated as a function of surgeon experience with adjustment for pathological stage, Gleason score and prostate specific antigen. A second model incorporated prior experience with open radical prostatectomy and surgeon generation. RESULTS: Positive surgical margins occurred in 1,862 patients (22%). There was an apparent improvement in surgical margin rates up to a plateau at 200 to 250 surgeries. Changes in margin rates once this plateau was reached were relatively minimal relative to the CIs. The absolute risk difference for 10 vs 250 prior surgeries was 4.8% (95% CI 1.5, 8.5). Neither surgeon generation nor prior open radical prostatectomy experience was statistically significant when added to the model. The rate of decrease in positive surgical margins was more rapid in the open vs laparoscopic learning curve. CONCLUSIONS: The learning curve for surgical margins after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy plateaus at approximately 200 to 250 cases. Prior open experience and surgeon generation do not improve the margin rate, suggesting that the rate is primarily a function of specifically laparoscopic training and experience.

PCA3: a new tool to diagnose prostate cancer (PCa) and a guidance in biopsy decisions. Preliminary report of the UrOP study.

OBJECTIVES: PCA3 is a prostate specific non-coding mRNA that is significantly overexpressed in prostate cancer tissue. Urinary PCA3 levels have been associated with prostate cancer grade suggesting a significant role in the diagnosis of prostate cancer. We measured urinary PCA3 score in 925 subjects from several areas of Italy assessing in 114 the association of urinary PCA3 score with the results of prostate biopsy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: First-catch urine samples were collected after digital rectal examination (DRE). PCA3 and PSA mRNA levels were measured using Trascription-mediated PCR amplification. The PCA3 score was calculated as the ratio of PCA3 and PSA mRNA (PCA3 mRNA/PSA mRNA x 1000) and the cut off was set at 35. RESULTS: A total of 925 PCA3 tests were performed from December 2008 to January 2010. The rate of informative PCA3 test was 99%, with 915 subjects showing a valid PCA3 score value: 443 patients (48.42%) presented a PCA3 score >/= 35 (cut-off) whereas the remaining 472 patients (51.58%) presented a PCA3 score lower the cut-off limit (< 35). Of the 443 patients with PCA3 score >/= 35, 105 (23.70%) underwent biopsy or rebiopsy. We found that 27 patients (25.71%) had no tumour at biopsy, 37 (35.24%) had HGPIN or ASAP and 41 (39.05%) had a cancer. Moreover, including the additonal 9 patients with PCA3 < 35, who underwent biopsy post PCA3 results, our data indicate that patients with negative biopsy (n = 31) show lower PCA3 score (mean = 54.9) compared with patients with positive biopsy (n = 45) (mean = 141.6) (p = 0.000183; two-tailed t-student test). The mean PCA3 score (79.6)for the patients diagnosed with HGPIN/ASAP at biopsy (n = 38) was intermediate between patients with negative and positive biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the PCA3 score is a valid tool for prostate cancer detection and its role in making better biopsy decisions. This marker consents to discriminate patients who have to undergo biopsy from patients who only need be actively surveilled: Quantitative PCA3 score is correlated with the probability of a positive result at biopsy.

Laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for large renal masses: results of a European survey.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the perioperative effectiveness of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for large (4-7 cm) renal masses, with a review of the experience of six European advanced laparoscopic centres. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A survey was planned; data were extracted from each institutional data base to obtain information about patients who had undergone LPN for renal masses larger than 4 cm. Demographic, radiological growth patterns of the tumours and intraoperative data were collected. Post-operative complications and pathological data were also recorded. All data were processed through statistical software. RESULTS: Data on 63 patients were collected. Radiological tumour size was 4.7 cm (4.1-7), growth pattern was cortical in 33 cases and cortico-medullar in 30 cases. Warm ischemia time (WIT) was 25.7 min in 7.3% cases bleeding occurred intra-operatively, post-operative surgical complications occurred in 14.6% cases. Pathological analyses revealed malignant lesion in 73% and positive margins in 6.5%. Complications and positive margins are more frequent for cortico-medullar lesions. CONCLUSIONS: This survey confirms that LPN for tumours 4-7 cm in size is feasible in experienced hands. WIT and overall complication rate remain questionable points.

Intraoperative frozen section in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: impact on cancer control.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative Frozen Section (IFS) with further tissue resection in case of positive margins has been proposed to decrease positive surgical margins rate during radical prostatectomy. There are a few reports on the benefits of this potential reduction of positive margins (PSM). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the oncological advantages of PSM rate reduction with the use of IFS and additional tissue excision in case of PSM. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTECIPANTS: 270 patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were included in a prospective study, to evaluate the results of further tissue excision in case of PSM at IFS. Median age was 65 yrs. Median PSA was 7.0 ng/ml. INTERVENTION: The prostate was extracted during the operation. IFS was performed in all patients on the prostate surface, at the base, the apex and along the postero-lateral aspect of the gland. In case of PSM additional tissue was excised from the site of the prostatic bed corresponding to the surgical margin. MEASUREMENTS: Endpoint was biochemical recurrence-free survival. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: PSM were found in 67 patients (24.8%). With additional tissue resection, PSM rate dropped from 24.8% to 12.6%. Decreased PSM after further resection didn't improve biochemical-free survival. Patients with initial PSM at IFS rendered negative with further resection, had similar results if compared to patients with margins still positive, and worse results if compared to patients with negative margins (NSM). Biochemical recurrence rate was 2.95% at 58 months in 203 patients with NSM, 15.1% at 54 months in 33 patients with PSM at IFS that were rendered negative after further resection, and 11.7% at 67 months in 34 patients with still PSM after additional resection. These results were confirmed also according to: stage, nerve-sparing procedure, Gleason score. CONCLUSIONS: Our data don't support IFS during radical prostatectomy to improve biochemical-free survival.