Is a 10-minute surgical scrub necessary in urologic prosthetic surgery? A randomized study of the effect of a 5- vs 10-minute surgical scrub on bacterial colony counts in the genital skin.

AIMS: To determine the antiseptic efficacy on bacterial colony counts of a 5- vs 10-minute surgical site scrub in urologic surgery. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 101 patients presenting for elective urological procedures. Patients were randomized to a 5- or 10-minute groin scrub with Betadine (povidone-iodine). Skin swabs were taken immediately after skin clipping and following routine painting with Betadine. A third swab was taken after the betadine skin scrub. Bacterial colony counts were reported as a number of colony-forming units (CFUs). The primary outcome measure was a quantitative comparison of CFUs in the two arms. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were randomized to a 5-minute scrub and 48 to a 10-minute scrub. After Betadine painting, CFUs were present in 38% of patients in the 5-minute group (mean, 33.5 CFU) and in 27% of the 10-minute group (mean, 45.4 CFU). Following the surgical scrub, only 7.5% of the 5-minute group and 8.3% of the 10-minute group had a measurable CFU count of greater than or equal to 1, and colony counts were low in both groups (5- minute group: mean, 1.5 CFU; 10-minute group: mean, 2.0 CFU). There was no significant difference in CFUs following a 5- or 10-minute scrub (P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a surgical skin scrub leads to a fourfold reduction in the skin CFU count compared with Betadine painting. However, there is no difference between the antibacterial effects of a 5- and 10-minute scrub. A 5-minute scrub may be sufficient in urologic prosthetic surgery.

Improved early and late continence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with concurrent bladder neck fascial sling (RoboSling).

Objective: To describe a novel RoboSling technique performed at the time of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and its utility for enhancing urinary function recovery postoperatively. Materials and Methods: The surgical technique involves harvesting a vascularised, fascial flap from the peritoneum on the posterior aspect of the bladder. Following completion of prostatectomy, the autologous flap is tunnelled underneath the bladder and incorporated into the rectourethralis and vertical longitudinal detrusor fibres at the posterior bladder neck with a modified Rocco suture. After urethra-vesical anastomosis is completed, the corners of the flap are hitched up to Cooper's ligament bilaterally with V-Loc sutures, tensioned and secured creating a bladder neck sling. A prospective, longitudinal cohort study was performed of 193 consecutive patients undergoing RARP between December 2016 and September 2019. The first 163 patients underwent standard RARP, and the last 30 patients had the RoboSling technique performed concurrently. Continence outcomes were the primary outcomes assessed using pad number and Expanded Prostate Cancer Composite (EPIC)-urinary domain questionnaire. Operative time (OT), estimated blood loss (EBL), complications and oncological outcomes were secondary outcomes. Results: The two groups were comparable for demographics and clinicopathological variables. At 3 months, zero pad usage (p = 0.005) and continence rates, defined as EPIC score ≥ 85 (p = 0.007), were both higher in the RoboSling group. EBL, complication rate and positive surgical margin rate did not differ between the two groups. Superior zero pad usage was observed at 1 year in the RoboSling group (p = 0.029). The RoboSling technique added on average 16 min to OT. Conclusions: The RoboSling procedure at the time of RARP was associated with earlier return to continence without negatively impacting other postoperative outcomes. This improvement in continence outcomes was maintained long term.

The evolution of image guidance in robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP): a glimpse into the future.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the innovative intraoperative technologies emerging to aid surgeons during minimally invasive robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. METHODS: We searched multiple electronic databases reporting on intraoperative imaging and navigation technologies, robotic surgery in combination with 3D modeling and 3D printing used during laparoscopic or robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Additional searches were conducted for articles that considered the role of artificial intelligence and machine learning and their application to robotic surgery. We excluded studies using intraoperative navigation technologies during open radical prostatectomy and studies considering technology to visualize lymph nodes. Intraoperative imaging using either transrectal ultrasonography or augmented reality was associated with a potential decrease in positive surgical margins rates. Improvements in detecting capsular involvement may be seen with augmented reality. The benefit, feasibility and applications of other imaging modalities such as 3D-printed models and optical imaging are discussed. CONCLUSION: The application of image-guided surgery and robotics has led to the development of promising new intraoperative imaging technologies such as augmented reality, fluorescence imaging, optical coherence tomography, confocal laser endomicroscopy and 3D printing. Currently challenges regarding tissue deformation and automatic tracking of prostate movements remain and there is a paucity in the literature supporting the use of these technologies. Urologic surgeons are encouraged to improve and test these advanced technologies in the clinical arena, preferably with comparative, randomized, trials.