Minimally invasive simple prostatectomy: Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopy. A comparative study.

PURPOSE: Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) is a novel surgical procedure for the management of obstructive symptoms caused by enlarged prostate glands. Before the introduction of minimally invasive techniques, the standard approach was the open simple prostatectomy (OSP). The aim of our study was to compare intraoperative and perioperative outcomes of robotic (RASP) and laparoscopic (LSP) simple prostatectomy. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent minimally invasive simple prostatectomy at the Urological Department of Portogruaro Hospital, Portogruaro, and at the Urological Department of "San Bassiano" Hospital, in Bassano del Grappa, from March 2015 to December 2020. Data collected from medical records included age, body mass index, prostate volume, operative time, preoperative International Prostatic Symptoms Score (IPSS), postoperative IPSS, time with drainage, blood transfusion, intraoperative complications, perioperative complications and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Robotic-assisted (n = 25) and laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (n = 25) were performed with a transvesical approach. No significant differences were observed regarding baseline characteristics, body mass index, prostate volume and IPSS. Operative time was lower in the laparoscopic group (122 min vs 139 min) (p = 0.024), while hospital stay was lower in the robotic group (4 days vs 6 days) (p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy is a safe technique with results comparable to laparoscopic simple prostatectomy, encompassing the advantage of a shorter hospitalization. Considering the costs and the limited availability of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy, laparoscopic simple prostatectomy is a valid and safe alternative for experienced surgeons.

Perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing urological elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a national overview across 28 Italian institutions.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to assess the safety of elective urological surgery performed during the pandemic by estimating the prevalence of COVID-19-like symptoms in the postoperative period and its correlation with perioperative and clinical factors. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this multicenter, observational study we recorded clinical, surgical and postoperative data of consecutive patients undergoing elective urological surgery in 28 different institutions across Italy during initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (between February 24 and March 30, 2020, inclusive). RESULTS: A total of 1943 patients were enrolled. In 12%, 7.1%, 21.3%, 56.7% and 2.6% of cases an open, laparoscopic, robotic, endoscopic or percutaneous surgical approach was performed, respectively. Overall, 166 (8.5%) postoperative complications were registered, 77 (3.9%) surgical and 89 (4.6%) medical. Twenty-eight (1.4%) patients were readmitted to hospital after discharge and 13 (0.7%) died. In the 30 days following discharge, fever and respiratory symptoms were recorded in 101 (5.2%) and 60 (3.1%) patients. At multivariable analysis, not performing nasopharyngeal swab at hospital admission (HR 2.3; CI 95% 1.01-5.19; p = 0.04) was independently associated with risk of developing postoperative medical complications. Number of patients in the facility was confirmed as an independent predictor of experiencing postoperative respiratory symptoms (p = 0.047, HR:1.12; CI95% 1.00-1.05), while COVID-19-free type of hospitalization facility was a strong independent protective factor (p = 0.02, HR:0.23, CI95% 0.07-0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Performing elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic does not seem to affect perioperative outcomes as long as proper preventive measures are adopted, including nasopharyngeal swab before hospital admission and hospitalization in dedicated COVID-19-free facilities.

The dramatic COVID 19 outbreak in Italy is responsible of a huge drop of urological surgical activity: a multicenter observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the trend in surgical volume in urology in Italy during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, as a result of the abrupt reorganisation of the Italian national health system to augment care provision to symptomatic patients with COVID-19. METHODS: A total of 33 urological units with physicians affiliated to the AGILE consortium (Italian Group for Advanced Laparo-Endoscopic Surgery; www.agilegroup.it) were surveyed. Urologists were asked to report the amount of surgical elective procedures week-by-week, from the beginning of the emergency to the following month. RESULTS: The 33 hospitals involved in the study account overall for 22 945 beds and are distributed in 13/20 Italian regions. Before the outbreak, the involved urology units performed overall 1213 procedures/week, half of which were oncological. A month later, the number of surgeries had declined by 78%. Lombardy, the first region with positive COVID-19 cases, experienced a 94% reduction. The decrease in oncological and non-oncological surgical activity was 35.9% and 89%, respectively. The trend of the decline showed a delay of roughly 2 weeks for the other regions. CONCLUSION: Italy, a country with a high fatality rate from COVID-19, experienced a sudden decline in surgical activity. This decline was inversely related to the increase in COVID-19 care, with potential harm particularly in the oncological field. The Italian experience may be helpful for future surgical pre-planning in other countries not so drastically affected by the disease to date.

Urology in the Time of Coronavirus: Reduced Access to Urgent and Emergent Urological Care during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Outbreak in Italy.

PURPOSE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put a substantial burden on the Italian healthcare system, resulting in the restructuring of hospitals to care for COVID-19 patients. However, this has likely impacted access to care for patients experiencing other conditions. We aimed to quantify the impact of COVID-19 on access to care for patients with urgent/emergent urological conditions throughout Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 33 urological units in the AGILE consortium, asking clinicians to report on the number of urgent/emergent urological patients seen and/or undergoing surgery over a 3-week period during the peak of the COVID-19 outbreak and a reference week prior to the outbreak. ANOVA and linear regression models were used to quantify these changes. RESULTS: Data from 27 urological centres in Italy showed a decrease from 956 patients/week seen just prior to the outbreak to 291 patients/week seen by the end of the study period. There was a difference in the number of patients with urgent/emergent urological disease seen within/during the different weeks (all p values < 0.05). A significant decrease in the number of patients presenting with haematuria, urinary retention, urinary tract infection, scrotal pain, renal colic, or trauma and urgent/emergent cases that required surgery was reported (all p values < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In Italy, during the COVID-19 outbreak there has been a decrease in patients seeking help for urgent/emergent urological conditions. Restructuring of hospitals and clinics is mandatory to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic; however, the healthcare system should continue to provide adequate levels of care also to patients with other conditions.

Is contrast enhancement needed for diagnostic prostate MRI?

Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System version 2 (PI-RADS v2) provides clinical guidelines for multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) [T2-weighted imaging (T2WI), diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI)] of prostate. However, DCE-MRI seems to show a limited contribution in prostate cancer (PCa) detection and management. In our experience, DCE-MRI, did not show significant change in diagnostic performance in addition to DWI and T2WI [biparametric MRI (bpMRI)] which represent the predominant sequences to detect suspected lesions in peripheral and transitional zone (TZ). In this article we reviewed the role of DCE-MRI also indicating the potential contribute of bpMRI approach (T2WI and DWI) and lesion volume evaluation in the diagnosis and management of suspected PCa.