Oncological outcomes following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy in a multiracial Asian population.

This study evaluates the oncological outcomes of RARP in a multiracial Asian population from a single institution. All suitable patients from 1st January 2003-30th June 2013 were identified from a prospectively maintained cancer registry. Peri-operative and oncological outcomes were analysed. Significance was defined as p < 0.05. There were n = 725 patients identified with a mean follow-up duration 28 months. The mean operative time, EBL and LOS were 186 min, 215 ml and 3 days, respectively. The pathological stage was pT2 in 68.6% (n = 497/725), pT3 in 31.3% (n = 227/725) and n = 1 patient with pT4 disease. The pathological Gleason scores (GS) were 6 in 27.9% (n = 202/725), GS 7 in 63.6% (n = 461/725) and GS ≥ 8 in 8.0 % (n = 58/725). The node positivity rate was 5.8% (n = 21/360). The positive margin rates were 31.0% (n = 154/497) and 70.9% (n = 161/227) for pT2 and pT3, respectively, and decreasing PSM rates are observed with surgical maturity. The biochemical recurrence rates were 9.7% (n = 48/497) and 34.2% (n = 78/228) for pT2 and pT3/T4, respectively. On multivariate analysis, independent predictors of BCR were pathological T stage and pathological Gleason score. Post-operatively, 78.5% (n = 569/725) of patients had no complications and 17.7% (n = 128/725) had minor (Clavien grade I-II) complications. This series, representing the largest from Southeast Asia, suggests that RARP can be a safe and oncologically feasible treatment for localised prostate cancer in an institution with moderate workload.

Prostate cancer in Asia: A collaborative report.

The incidence of prostate cancer (PCa) within Asian population used to be much lower than in the Western population; however, in recent years the incidence and mortality rate of PCa in some Asian countries have grown rapidly. This collaborative report summarized the latest epidemiology information, risk factors, and racial differences in PCa diagnosis, current status and new trends in surgery management and novel agents for castration-resistant prostate cancer. We believe such information would be helpful in clinical decision making for urologists and oncologists, health-care ministries and medical researchers.

Laparoscopic nephrectomy: new standard of care?

OBJECTIVE: The pace of implementation of a laparoscopic nephrectomy programme is affected by factors including surgical expertise, case load, learning curves and outcome audits. We report our experience in introducing a laparoscopic nephrectomy programme over a 3-year period. METHODS: From January 2001 to December 2003, 187 nephrectomies were performed (105 by conventional surgery, 82 by laparoscopy). Hand-assisted laparoscopy was used predominantly. The indications for surgery, factors affecting the approach and outcome parameters were studied. A cost comparison was made between patients with similar-sized renal tumours undergoing laparoscopic versus open surgery. RESULTS: Most operations were performed for malignancy in both the open (70%) and laparoscopic (67%) surgery groups. The laparoscopic approach was most commonly used in upper tract transitional cell cancers (TCCs; 70% of 30 patients) and benign pathologies (49% of 35 patients), followed by radical nephrectomies (34% of 99 patients) and donor nephrectomies (44% of 23 patients). There was a rapid rise in laparoscopic surgeries, from 30% in 2001 to 58% in 2002. The median hospital stay was 5.8 days in the laparoscopic group and 8.1 days in the open surgery group. The procedure cost for laparoscopic surgery was 4,943 dollars compared with 4,479 dollars for open surgery. However, due to a shorter hospital stay, the total hospital cost was slightly lower in the laparoscopic group (7,500 dollars versus 7,907 dollars). CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach for various renal pathologies was quickly established with a rapid increase in the number of laparoscopic procedures.