Photoselective vaporization of the prostate: study outcomes as a function of risk of bias, conflicts of interest, and industrial sponsorship.

PURPOSE: To investigate the outcomes of comparative studies on photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) as a function of risk of bias (RoB), conflicts of interest (COI), and industrial sponsorship (IS). METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search for comparative studies on PVP [randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomized comparative studies (NRCSs)]. Study selection as well as comprehensive assessment of RoB, COIs, and IS were performed in duplicate. The identified studies were further rated by two independent board-certified urologists as either PVP-favourable or PVP-unfavourable. Descriptive statistics were performed among all identified studies and among the subgroups of studies rated as favourable and unfavourable, respectively. RESULTS: Sixty-five studies qualified for inclusion (25 RTCs and 40 NRCSs) of which 56 (86%) were rated favourable and 9 (14%) unfavourable. A majority of all studies mentioned the absence/presence of potential COIs (78%). In contrast, a sponsorship statement was only found in 29% of the investigations. Studies rated favourable demonstrated a higher percentage of COIs (39% versus 22%). IS was exclusively found among favourable studies. Furthermore, a serious or critical RoB was more often found in favourably rated NRCSs. CONCLUSIONS: COIs and IS seem to be associated with favourable study outcomes in comparative studies on PVP. The transparency of the whole research process from study conception to the dissemination of the results has to be further improved to prevent a harmful effect of COIs and IS on the internal validity of studies.

Downsides of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: limitations and complications.

CONTEXT: Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) using the da Vinci Surgical System (Intuitive Surgical, Sunnyvale, CA, USA) is now in widespread use for the management of localised prostate cancer (PCa). Many reports of the safety and efficacy of this procedure have been published. However, there are few specific reports of the limitations and complications of RALP. OBJECTIVE: The primary purpose of this review is to ascertain the downsides of RALP by focusing on complications and limitations of this approach. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A Medline search of the English-language literature was performed to identify all papers published since 2001 relating to RALP. Papers providing data on technical failures, complications, learning curve, or other downsides of RALP were considered. Of 412 papers identified, 68 were selected for review based on their relevance to the objective of this paper. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: RALP has the following principal downsides: (1) device failure occurs in 0.2-0.4% of cases; (2) assessment of functional outcome is unsatisfactory because of nonstandardised assessment techniques; (3) overall complication rates of RALP are low, although higher rates are noted when complications are reported using a standardised system; (4) long-term oncologic data and data on high-risk PCa are limited; (5) a steep learning curve exists, and although acceptable operative times can be achieved in <20 cases, positive surgical margin (PSM) rates may require experience with >80 cases before a plateau is achieved; (6) robotic assistance does not reduce the difficulty associated with obese patients and those with large prostates, middle lobes, or previous surgery, in whom outcomes are less satisfactory than in patients without such factors; (7) economic barriers prevent uniform dissemination of robotic technology. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the downsides of RALP identified in this paper can be addressed with longer-term data and more widespread adoption of standardised reporting measures. The significant learning curve should not be understated, and the expense of this technology continues to restrict access for many patients.

Sexual function after transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP): results of an independent prospective multicentre assessment of outcome.

OBJECTIVES: The influence of surgical treatment of bladder outlet obstruction on sexual function is uncertain and available evidence is conflicting. Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) causes retrograde ejaculation, but its effect on erectile function is controversial. We have prospectively investigated the influence of TURP on erectile and ejaculatory function. METHODS: Between January 2000 and January 2005, 11 hospitals in Switzerland informed the Verein Outcome (VO), an independent institution specialising in outcome measurements in the Swiss health care system, about patients scheduled for TURP. VO obtained the Danish Prostate Symptom Score (DAN-PSS) including the sexual function domain (DAN-PSSsex) before and 4 mo after surgery and compared the respective scores. RESULTS: Data from 1014 patients were evaluated. Mean patient age was 69 yr. DAN-PSSsex questionnaires were returned by 988 patients before and 642 patients after TURP; 722 (73.1%) and 474 (73.8%) of the patients, respectively, stated that they were still sexually active. The mean erectile function score improved insignificantly from 1.66 to 1.47 (p=0.11), the mean ejaculatory function score worsened from 1.27 to 2.34 (p<0.00) and the mean discomfort on ejaculation score improved from 0.37 to 0.29 (p=0.10) before and after TURP, respectively. CONCLUSION: The results confirm that TURP has no negative influence on the quality of erections measured by self-assessment questionnaires. The loss of ejaculatory function is significant and is associated with considerable bother. However, three of four patients undergoing TURP are still sexually active and the surgery has no influence on this ratio.