Older versus younger patients in robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal ileal conduit comparing safety and clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted radical cystectomy using an intracorporeal ileal conduit in older compared to younger patients. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 122 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical cystectomy with an intracorporeal ileal conduit at Fujita Health University Hospital and Fujita Health University Okazaki Medical Center between 2012 and 2022. Patients were categorized into two groups: older (age ≥ 75 years; n = 53) and younger (age < 75 years; n = 69). Perioperative outcomes, complications, recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival were compared between the cohorts. RESULTS: The groups had no significant differences in perioperative outcomes, such as estimated blood loss, operative time, and blood transfusion rate. However, hospital stay was longer in the older patients than in the younger group (19 vs. 16 days; p < 0.001). The 30-day minor and major complication rates were 33.3% and 13.0%, respectively, for the younger group and 50.9% and 9.4% for the older group (p = 0.11). Urinary tract infection and bowel ileus were the most common complications in both groups. No significant differences were observed in recurrence-free survival, cancer-specific survival, and overall survival between the groups (p = 0.58, p = 0.75, and p = 0.78), and subgroup analysis in ≥cT3 revealed the older group tended to have poorer cancer-specific survival and overall survival (p = 0.07 and p = 0.01). Multivariate analysis indicated that older age was not associated with high-grade complications and cancer-specific survival. CONCLUSIONS: Robot-assisted radical cystectomy with an intracorporeal ileal conduit is a safe and effective treatment option for older patients.

Comparing pentafecta outcomes between nerve sparing and non nerve sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in a propensity score-matched study.

Pentafecta (continence, potency, cancer control, free surgical margins, and no complications) is an important outcome of prostatectomy. Our objective was to assess the pentafecta achievement between nerve-spring and non-nerve-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in a large single-center cohort. The study included 1674 patients treated with RARP between August 2009 and November 2022 to assess the clinical outcomes. Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate the prognostic significance of RARP for pentafecta achievement, and 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) was performed between the nerve-sparing and non-nerve-sparing to test the validity of the results. Pentafecta definition included continence, which was defined as the use of zero pads; potency, which was defined as the ability to achieve and maintain satisfactory erections or ones firm enough for sexual activity and sexual intercourse. The biochemical recurrence rate was defined as two consecutive PSA levels > 0.2 ng/mL after RARP; 90-day Clavien-Dindo complications ≤ 3a; and a negative surgical pathologic margin. The median follow-up period was 61.3 months (IQR 6-159 months). A multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated that pentafecta achievement was significantly associated with nerve-sparing (NS) approach (1188 patients) (OR 4.16; 95% CI 2.51-6.9), p < 0.001), unilateral nerve preservation (983 patients) (OR 3.83; 95% CI 2.31-6.37, p < 0.001) and bilateral nerve preservation (205 patients) (OR 7.43; 95% CI 4.14-13.36, p < 0.001). After propensity matching, pentafecta achievement rates in the NS (476 patients) and non-NS (476 patients) groups were 72 (15.1%) and 19 (4%), respectively. (p < 0.001). NS in RARP offers a superior advantage in pentafecta achievement compared with non-NS RARP. This validation study provides the pentafecta outcome after RARP associated with nerve-sparing in clinical practice.

Laparoscopic transperitoneal adrenalectomy in the large adrenal tumor from single center experience.

BACKGROUND: The role of laparoscopic adrenalectomy (LA) in a large adrenal tumor is controversial due to the risk of malignancy and technical difficulty. In this study, we compared the perioperative outcomes and complications of LA on large (≥ 6 cm) and (< 6 cm) adrenal tumors. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all clinical data of patients who underwent unilateral transperitoneal LA in our institution between April 2000 and June 2019. Patients were classified by tumor size into 2 groups. Patients in group 1 had tumor size < 6 cm (n = 408) and patient in group 2 had tumor size ≥ 6 cm (n = 48). Demographic data, perioperative outcomes, complications, and pathologic reports were compared between groups. RESULTS: Patients in group 2 were significant older (p = 0.04), thinner (p = 0.001) and had lower incident of hypertension (p = 0.001), with a significantly higher median operative time (75 vs 120 min), estimated blood loss (20 vs 100 ml), transfusion rate (0 vs 20.8%), conversion rate (0.25 vs 14.6%) and length of postoperative stays ( 4 vs 5.5 days) than in group 2 (all p < 0.001). Group 2 patients also had significantly higher frequency of intraoperative complication (4.7 vs 31.3%; adjust Odds Ratio [OR] = 9.67 (95% CI 4.22-22.17), p-value < 0.001) and postoperative complication (5.4 vs 31.3%; adjust OR = 5.67 (95% CI 2.48-12.97), p-value < 0.001). Only eight (1.8%) major complications occurred in this study. The most common pathology in group 2 patient was pheochromocytoma and metastasis. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic transperitoneal adrenalectomy in large adrenal tumor ≥ 6 cm is feasible but associated with significantly worse intraoperative complications, postoperative complications, and recovery. However, most of the complications were minor and could be managed conservatively. Careful patient selection with the expert surgeon in adrenal surgery is the key factor for successful laparoscopic surgery in a large adrenal tumor. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered in the Thai Clinical Trials Registry on 02/03/2020. The registration number was TCTR20200312004.