Robot-assisted vs open retropubic radical prostatectomy: a propensity score-matched comparative analysis based on 15 years and 18,805 patients.

PURPOSE: To compare oncological, functional, and surgical outcomes of a large cohort of patients who underwent open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP) or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from 18,805 RPs performed with either the open or the robot-assisted approaches at a single tertiary referral center between 2008 and 2022 were analyzed. The impact of surgical approach on biochemical recurrence-free survival, salvage radiotherapy-free survival, and metastasis-free survival was analyzed by log-rank test and Kaplan-Meier analysis in a propensity score (PS)-based matched cohort. Intraoperative and postoperative surgical outcomes were assessed. One-week, 3-month, and 12-month continence rates and 12-month erectile function (EF) were analyzed. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in oncological outcomes were found between ORP and RARP. A slight statistically significant difference in favor of RARP was noted in urinary continence at 3 months (RARP vs. ORP: 81% vs. 77%, p = 0.007) and 12 months (91% vs. 89.3%, p = 0.008), respectively. The rate of EF was statistically significantly higher (60%) after RARP than after ORP (45%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both RARP and ORP yielded similar oncological outcomes. RARP offered a slight advantage in terms of continence recovery, but its clinical significance may be less meaningful. RARP resulted in significantly improved postoperative EF, suggesting a potential influence of both surgical experience and minimally invasive approach.

Impact of COVID-19 on the time to counseling and treatment of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: This study investigates how the COVID-19 pandemic (CP) impacted the timeline between initial diagnosis (ID) of prostate carcinoma and subsequent therapy consultation (TC) or radical prostatectomy (RP) due to the implementation of a "minimal contact concept," which postponed clinical examinations until the day of admission. METHODS: We analyzed patient data from a tertiary care center from 2018 to September 2021. The focus was on comparing the time intervals from ID to TC and from ID to RP before and during the CP. RESULTS: Of 12,255 patients, 6,073 (61.6%) were treated before and 3,791 (38.4%) during the CP. The median time from ID to TC reduced from 37 days (IQR: 21 - 58d) pre-CP to 32 days (IQR: 20 - 50d) during CP (p < 0.001). Similarly, the time from ID to RP decreased from 98 days (IQR: 70 - 141d) to 75 days (IQR: 55 - 108d; p < 0.001) during the CP. There was a significant decrease in low-risk tumor cases at ID (18.9% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.003) and post-RP (4% vs. 6.7%; p < 0.001) during the CP. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic facilitated more timely treatment of prostate cancer, suggesting potential benefits for both low-risk and aggressive tumor management through expedited clinical procedures.

Outcome of patients with epithelialized cavity formation after excessive vesicourethral anastomotic leak post radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: Excessive vesicourethral anastomotic leak (EVAL) is a rare but severe complication after radical prostatectomy (RP). Epithelialized vesicourethral cavity formation (EVCF) usually develops during prolonged catheterization. To our knowledge, there is no description of postoperative outcomes, complications, or functional assessment of these patients who received conservative therapy after EVAL. METHODS: We identified 70 patients (0.56%) with radiographic evidence of EVCF out of 12,434 patients who received RP in 2016-2020 at our tertiary care center. Postoperative radiographic cystograms (CG) were retrospectively re-examined by two urologists individually. We assessed urinary continence (UC), the need for intervention due to anastomotic stricture formation, urinary tract infection (UTI), and symphysitis during the first year of follow-up post-RP. RESULTS: The median age was 66 years [interquartile range (IQR) 61-70 years], the median body mass index was 27.8 kg/m2 (IQR 25.5-30.3 kg/m2), and the median prostate specific antigen before RP was 7.1 ng/ml (IQR 4.7-11.8 ng/ml). The median catheter insertion time was 44.5 days (IQR 35.2-54 days). One-year continence follow-up was available for 27 patients (38.6%), of which 22 (81.5%) reported the use of ≤ one pad, two patients reported the use of two (7.4%) pads/24 h, and three (11.1%) patients reported use > two pads/24 h. Overall, four (5.7%) patients needed surgical reintervention for anastomotic stricture, eight (11.5%) patients presented with symphysitis, and 55 (77.1%) presented with UTI. CONCLUSION: UC in 81.5% 1-year post-RP suggests that conservative treatment in EVAL is a treatment option with an acceptable outcome on UC and should be considered before reintervention for anastomotic insufficiency.

Histopathological results of radical prostatectomy specimen of men younger than 50 years of age at the time of surgery: possible implications for prostate cancer screening programs?

INTRODUCTION: Prostate cancer (PCa) detection is usually achieved by PSA measurement and, if indicated, further diagnostics. The recent EAU guidelines recommend a first PSA test at the age of 50 years, if no family history of PCa or BRCA2 mutation exists. However, some men might harbor significant PCa at younger age; thus we evaluated the histopathological results of men treated with radical prostatectomy (RP) in their 40 s at our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We relied on the data of all patients who underwent RP in our institution between 1992 and 2020 and were younger than 50 years at the time of surgery. The histopathological results are descriptively presented. Moreover, we tested the effect of a positive family history on the descriptive results. RESULTS: Overall, 1225 patients younger than 50 years underwent RP at our institution. Median age was 47 years. Most patients showed favorable histopathological characteristics. However, 20% of patients had extraprostatic disease (≥ pT3a), 15% had ISUP Gleason grade group ≥ 3, and 7% had positive lymph nodes (pN1). Patients with a known positive family history did not have a higher rate of adverse disease as their counterparts with a negative family history. DISCUSSION: Our data show that the majority of patients who were diagnosed with PCa at a very young age had favorable histopathological RP characteristics. However, a non-negligible proportion of patients already showed locally advanced disease and would have probably benefited from earlier PCa detection. This should be kept in mind when PCa screening recommendations are proposed.

Concordance of biopsy and pathologic ISUP grading in salvage radical prostatectomy patients for recurrent prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To investigate the concordance of biopsy and pathologic International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading in salvage radical prostatectomy (SRP) patients for recurrent prostate cancer. METHODS: Within a high-volume center database, we identified patients who underwent SRP for recurrent prostate cancer (PCa) between 2004 and 2020. Upgrading, downgrading, concordance, and any discordance between posttreatment biopsy ISUP and ISUP at SRP were tested. Logistic regression models were used to predict ISUP upgrading and ISUP discordance. Models were adjusted for prostatic specific antigen before SRP, age at surgery, initial prostatic specific antigen (PSA), type of primary treatment, time from primary PCa diagnosis to SRP, number of positive cores at biopsy, and original Gleason score. RESULTS: Overall, 184 patients with available biopsy and pathologic ISUP grading were identified. Of those, 17.4% (n = 32), 40.8% (n = 75), 19.6% (n = 36), and 22.2% (n = 41) harbored biopsy ISUP 1, ISUP 2, ISUP 3, and ISUP 4-5 grading, respectively. Pathologic ISUP 1, ISUP 2, ISUP 3, and ISUP 4-5 grading was recorded in 6.0% (n = 11), 40.8% (n = 75), 32.1% (n = 59), and 21.2% (n = 39), respectively. Median PSA before SRP was 5.5 ng/ml (interquartile range [IQR]: 3.1-8.1 ng/ml), median age at SRP was 65.1 years (IQR:60.7-69.4 years) and median time from original PCa diagnosis to SRP was 47 months (IQR: 27.3-85.2 months). Concordance of biopsy and pathologic ISUP was identified in 45.1% (n = 83). Conversely, any ISUP discordance, upgrading and downgrading of at least one ISUP group was identified in 54.9% (n = 101), 35.3% (n = 65), and 19.6% (n = 36). In logistic models, none of the preoperative characteristics was associated with upgrading or ISUP discordance (all p > 0.1). CONCLUSION: Discordance between biopsy and pathologic ISUP grading is common at SRP. However, in 45% of SRP cases biopsy ISUP is capable to predict pathologic ISUP. Further studies are necessary to identify characteristics for ISUP upgrading at SRP.

Preprostatic lymph nodes in prostate cancer hot or not? Impact on oncological outcome after radical prostatectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of preprostatic lymph node invasion on prostate cancer patients' outcome after radical prostatectomy. It is known that invasion of pelvic lymph nodes is associated with worse oncological outcome, but little is known about invasion of preprostatic lymph nodes. We hypothesized that positive preprostatic lymph nodes may not be as harmful as positive pelvic lymph nodes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 11,107 consecutive patients treated for prostate cancer with radical prostatectomy between 2013 and 2017 were evaluated. 1575 (14.2%) had some type of lymph node invasion, 53 (0.5%) had only one positive preprostatic lymph node and 705 (6.3%) had only one positive pelvic lymph node. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 37.7 months (interquartile range: 24.6-58.7 months). Baseline characteristics of the overall cohort were not statistically significant between the preprostatic vs. pelvic lymph node invasion groups, except for robot-assisted operation (64.2 vs. 32.3%, p < 0.001) and count of removed lymph nodes (16 vs. 19, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in 3-years biochemical recurrence rate (56.2 vs. 65.8%, p = 0.5), 3-years metastases free survival rate (87.4 vs. 95.5%, p = 0.5) and overall cancer-specific mortality (1.9 vs 1.0%) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preprostatic lymph node invasion seems to have a similar harmful effect as pelvic lymph node invasion and thus, if detected, may alter treatment and follow-up strategy. Therefore, it is important to perform a histological analysis when removing the preprostatic tissue.

Oncologic impact of concomitant prostate cancer characteristics at the time of radical cystoprostatectomy for bladder cancer: a population-based analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of concomitant prostate cancer (PCa) of the cancer-specific mortality (CSM) in the aging patient's papulation with bladder cancer (BCa) treated with radical cystoprostatectomy (RCP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Within the SEER database (2004-2015), 1468 patients were treated with RCP for BCa harboring histopathological PCa findings. To account for other cause mortality (OCM), multivariable competing risk regression (CRR) tested for potential BCa-CSM differences according to PCa characteristics risk factors predicting CSM. RESULTS: CRR analysis revealed that only following BCa characteristics, as high pathological tumor stages(Ta/Tis/T1 [REF.] vs. T2; HR 2.03, 95% CI: 1.16-3.57, p = 0.014 vs. T3; HR 4.32, 95% CI: 2.45-7.61, p < 0.001 vs. T4; HR 5.06, 95% CI: 2.77-9.22, p < 0.001), as well unfavorable BCa grade IV (Grade I-II [REF.] vs. Grade IV; HR 0.58, 95% CI: 0.35-0.98, p < 0.041) achieved independent predictor status of CSM. With regard to PCa characteristics, none of the covariates yielded independent predictor status of CSM. CONCLUSIONS: Our study, based on the largest population cohort, demonstrates that even in organ-confined BCa patients, concomitant PCa as second malignancy does not represent a risk factor for survival.

Significant reduction of lymphoceles after radical prostatectomy and pelvic lymph node dissection.

OBJECTIVES: To reduce the risk of symptomatic lymphocele (SLC), we present a technique using peritoneal fenestration that allows lymphatic fluid to drain into the abdomen, as SLC formation after open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP) with pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is a common adverse event. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 1513 patients who underwent ORP with PLND between July 2018 and November 2019. Of those, 307 patients (20.3%) received peritoneal fenestration and 1206 (79.7%) no fenestration. The rate of LCs and the necessity for intervention were analysed by uni- and multivariable logistic regression (MLR) models. A propensity score matching was performed, as well. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 65 (60-70) years. A median (IQR) of 16 (10-22) lymph nodes were dissected, 22 vs 14 lymph nodes in the fenestration vs non-fenestration group (P < 0.001). Overall, 189 patients (12.5%) were diagnosed with a LC after ORP, while 21 patients (6.8%) in the fenestration and 168 (13.9%) in the non-fenestration group had LCs (P = 0.001). In 70 patients (4.7%), LCs required further intervention, categorised as Clavien-Dindo Grade IIIa/b, with a smaller proportion in the fenestration group (2.9% vs 5.0% in the non-fenestration group, P < 0.001). There were no Clavien-Dindo Grade IV or V complications, in particular no abdominal complications in association with peritoneal fenestration observed. In MLR, peritoneal fenestration was associated with a reduced risk of LCs (odds ratio [OR] 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-0.5; P < 0.001). The risk reduction was also shown after propensity score matching (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.21-0.68; P = 0.001). The number needed to treat was 14. CONCLUSIONS: Peritoneal fenestration may decrease the rate of SLC after ORP with (extended) PLND. Therefore, it should be part of the operative strategy.

Prevention of thromboembolic events after radical prostatectomy in patients with hereditary thrombophilia due to a factor V Leiden mutation by multidisciplinary coagulation management.

Objective: To examine the perioperative impact of factor V Leiden mutation on thromboembolic events' risk in radical prostatectomy (RP) patients. With an incidence of about 5%, factor V Leiden mutation is the most common hereditary hypercoagulability among Caucasians and rarer in Asia. The increased risk of thromboembolic events is three- to seven-fold in heterozygous and to 80-fold in homozygous patients. Methods: Within our prospectively collected database, we analysed 33 006 prostate cancer patients treated with RP between December 2001 and December 2020. Of those, patients with factor V Leiden mutation were identified. All patients received individualised recommendation of haemostaseologists for perioperative anticoagulation. Thromboembolic complications (deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism) were assessed during hospital stay, as well as according to patient reported outcomes within the first 3 months after RP. Results: Overall, 85 (0.3%) patients with known factor V Leiden mutation were identified. Median age was 65 (interquartile range: 61-68) years. There was at least one thrombosis in 53 (62.4%) patients and 31 (36.5%) patients had at least one embolic event in their medical history before RP. Within all 85 patients with factor V Leiden mutation, we experienced no thromboembolic complications within the first 3 months after surgery. Conclusion: In our cohort of patients with factor V Leiden mutation, no thromboembolic events were observed after RP with an individualised perioperative coagulation management concept. This may reassure patients with this hereditary condition who are counselled for RP.

Nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy using the neurovascular structure-adjacent frozen-section examination (NeuroSAFE): results after 20 years of experience.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes and functional results of the neurovascular structure-adjacent frozen-section examination (NeuroSAFE) during nerve-sparing (NS) radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 10-yr survival analysis on 11069 RPs performed with or without the NeuroSAFE, between January 2002 to June 2011 was carried out. In the NeuroSAFE cohort, the neurovascular structure-adjacent prostatic margins are removed and stained for cryo-sectioning during RP. In case of a PSM, partial or full removal of the neurovascular bundle was performed. The impact of NeuroSAFE on biochemical recurrence-free survival (BFS), salvage radiation therapy-free survival, metastasis-free survival, and prostate cancer-specific survival at 10 years was analyzed. 1-year (1-yr) erectile function (EF), 1-yr, and 2-yr continence rates were assessed in propensity score-based matched cohorts. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 121 (IQR: 73, 156) months. No differences in BFS between NeuroSAFE and non-NeuroSAFE were recorded (10-yr BFS: NeuroSAFE vs non-Neurosafe, pT2: 81% vs 84%, p = 0.06; pT3a: 58% vs. 63%, p = 0.6; ≥pT3b: 22% vs. 27%, p = 0.99). No differences were found between the two groups in terms of sRFS (pT2: p = 0.1; pT3a: p = 0.4; ≥pT3b: p = 0.4) (Fig. 1B, Table 2), and MTS (pT2: p = 0.3; pT3a: p = 0.6; ≥pT3b: p = 0.9). The NeuroSAFE-navigated patients reported a better 1-yr EF than non-NeuroSAFE (68% vs. 58%, p = 0.02) and no differences in 1-yr and 2-yr continence rates (92.4% vs. 91.8%, and 93.4% vs. 93%, respectively). The main limitation is the retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS: While the NeuroSAFE approach did not show significant improvements in long-term oncologic or continence outcomes, it did provide an opportunity for a higher proportion of patients to improve postoperative functional results, possibly through increased nerve-sparing procedures.