Outcomes of Hem-o-Lok clip migration at vesico-urethral anastomotic site post-robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single centre experience.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) is the most preferred intervention for the management of prostatic malignancy worldwide. Hem-o-Lok clips (HOLC) are widely used for haemostasis and lateral pedicle ligation. These clips are prone to migrate and lodge at the anastomotic junction as well as inside the bladder causing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) secondary to bladder neck contracture (BNC) or bladder calculi. The objective of this study is to describe the incidence, clinical presentation, management, and outcome of HOLC migration. METHODOLOGY: Retrospective analysis of the database of Post RALP patients who developed LUTS secondary to HOLC migration was done. Cystoscopy findings, number of procedures required, number of HOLC removed intra-operatively, and follow-up of the patients was reviewed. RESULTS: The incidence of HOLC migration requiring intervention was 1.78% (9/505). The mean age of the patient, BMI, Pre-operative Serum PSA were 62.8 years, 27.8 kg/m2, and 9.8 ng/mL, respectively. The mean duration of appearance of symptoms due to HOLC migration was 9 months. Two patients presented with Haematuria and 7 presented with LUTS. Seven patients required a single intervention while 2 required up to 6 procedures for recurrent symptoms secondary to recurrent HOLC migration. CONCLUSION: HOLC use in RALP may present with migration and associated complications. HOLC migration is associated with severe BNC and may require multiple endoscopic interventions. Severe dysuria and LUTS not responding to medical management should be treated using an algorithmic approach and there should be a low threshold for performing cystoscopy and intervention in these cases to improve outcomes.

Laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation for lower ureter pathology: Single-institutional comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare and analyze the results of laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation and robotic-assisted ureteric reimplantation at our tertiary institute. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data of adult patients who underwent laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation and robotic-assisted ureteric reimplantation between January 2000 and December 2020. Data were analyzed for 19 patients in the laparoscopic group and 47 patients in the robotic group. The data were compared in both the groups. RESULTS: The most common presentation was flank pain (67.89%) followed by recurrent UTI (21.05%) in both the groups. The baseline characteristics and demographic data including age, gender, laterality, Charlson comorbidity index, and BMI were comparable in both the groups. The time range from previous surgeries to presentation varied from 7 days to 5 years. There is statistically significant difference between the operative time in the laparoscopic (224.23 ± 76.61 min) and robotic groups (187.06 ± 52.81 min) (p = 0.027). There is statistically significant difference between the hospital stay also between the two groups (9.07 ± 2.75 vs. 6 ± 1.65 days p-0.001). There were no differences in the complication rate and postoperative outcomes in both the groups. Mean length of follow-up was 28 ± 25.5 (2-108) months and 20.57 ± 19.91 (2-96) months in both the groups, respectively. The success rates in terms of symptomatic improvement, decrease in hydronephrosis, and improved drainage in the laparoscopic and robotic groups were 94.73% and 95.45%, respectively, which were statistically not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic ureteric reimplantation and laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation are comparable in clinical outcomes. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic ureteric reimplantation is feasible, safe, and faster with excellent outcomes, decreased hospital stay, and minimal complications.

Suprailiac versus transiliac approach in transforaminal endoscopic discectomy at L5-S1: a new surgical classification of L5-iliac crest relationship and guidelines for approach.

BACKGROUND: Approach to the L5-S1 level with transforaminal access can be challenging. Some surgeons employ the interlaminar or paraspinal endoscopic approach as an alternative apart from the other minimally invasive posterior surgical options. To precisely target and safely access disc herniations at L5-S1, the authors attempted to stratify patients into trans and supra iliac approach groups and propose a simple surgical classification based on the radiographic findings. METHODS: A prospective study was performed on a cohort of 90 patients with L5-S1 disc herniation who underwent transforaminal endoscopic discectomy through suprailiac or transiliac approach depending on the best trajectory to access the herniated disc. Preoperative radiological assessment was done on anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of the lumbosacral spine by two independent observers. The proposed classification and approach guidelines were used to stratify patients for the preferred access route. The outcome was measured as mean VAS and ODI scores pre-operative and at 6 months post-operative and compared using the null hypothesis (P value) and the paired t-test. The interrater reliability was calculated as the percentage agreement between different observers. RESULTS: The L5-S1 disc herniation was treated with the transforaminal approach in 46 patients via the suprailiac and in the remaining 44 patients via the transiliac approach. There were statistically significant VAS and ODI reductions in patients of both groups (P<0.05). Interrater reliability of 92.5% using percent agreement shows strong level of agreement. CONCLUSIONS: This surgical approach classification based on radiographs aids in the preoperative planning for selection of patients to either suprailiac or transiliac approach for transforaminal endoscopic surgery at L5-S1 level.