Preparedness for side effects and bother in symptomatic men after radical prostatectomy in a prospective, non-randomized trial, LAPPRO.

BACKGROUND: Many clinicians believe that preparedness before surgery for possible post-surgery side effects reduces the level of bother experienced from urinary incontinence and decreased sexual health after surgery. There are no published studies evaluating this belief. Therefore, we aimed to study the level of preparedness before radical prostatectomy and the level of bother experienced from urinary incontinence and decreased sexual health after surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We prospectively collected data from a non-selected group of men undergoing radical prostatectomy in 14 centers between 2008 and 2011. Before surgery, we asked about preparedness for surgery-induced urinary problems and decreased sexual health. One year after surgery, we asked about bother caused by urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction. As a measure of the association between preparedness and bothersomeness we modeled odds ratios (ORs) by means of logistic regression. RESULTS: Altogether 1372 men had urinary incontinence one year after surgery as well as had no urinary leakage or a small urinary dribble before surgery. Among these men, low preparedness was associated with bother resulting from urinary incontinence [OR 2.84; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.59-5.10]. In a separate analysis of 1657 men we found a strong association between preparedness for decreased sexual health and experiencing bother from erectile dysfunction (OR 5.92; 95% CI 3.32-10.55). CONCLUSION: In this large-sized prospective trial, we found that preparedness before surgery for urinary problems or sexual side effects decreases bother from urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction one year after surgery.

Urinary Incontinence and Erectile Dysfunction After Robotic Versus Open Radical Prostatectomy: A Prospective, Controlled, Nonrandomised Trial.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has become widely used without high-grade evidence of superiority regarding long-term clinical outcomes compared with open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), the gold standard. OBJECTIVE: To compare patient-reported urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction 12 mo after RALP or RRP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This was a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial of patients undergoing prostatectomy in 14 centres using RALP or RRP. Clinical-record forms and validated patient questionnaires at baseline and 12 mo after surgery were collected. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSES: Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with logistic regression and adjusted for possible confounders. The primary end point was urinary incontinence (change of pad less than once in 24h vs one time or more per 24h) at 12 mo. Secondary end points were erectile dysfunction at 12 mo and positive surgical margins. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: At 12 mo after RALP, 366 men (21.3%) were incontinent, as were 144 (20.2%) after RRP. The unadjusted OR was 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87­1.34). Erectile dysfunction was observed in 1200 men (70.4%) 12 mo after RALP and 531 (74.7%) after RRP. The unadjusted OR was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.66­0.98). CONCLUSIONS: In a Swedish setting, RALP for prostate cancer was modestly beneficial in preserving erectile function compared with RRP, without a statistically significant difference regarding urinary incontinence or surgical margins. PATIENT SUMMARY: We compared patient-reported urinary incontinence after prostatectomy with two types of surgical technique. There was no statistically significant improvement in the rate of urinary leakage, but there was a small improvement regarding erectile function after robot-assisted operation.

Degree of preservation of the neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy and urinary continence 1 year after surgery.

BACKGROUND: Many elderly or impotent men with prostate cancer may not receive a bundle-preserving radical prostatectomy as a result of uncertainty regarding the effect on urinary incontinence. OBJECTIVE: We searched for predictors of urinary incontinence 1 yr after surgery among surgical steps during radical prostatectomy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: More than 100 surgeons in 14 centers prospectively collected data on surgical steps during an open or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. At 1 yr after surgery, a neutral third-party secretariat collected patient-reported information on urinary incontinence. After excluding men with preoperative urinary incontinence or postoperative irradiation, data were available for 3379 men. INTERVENTION: Surgical steps during radical prostatectomy, including dissection plane as a measure of the degree of preservation of the two neurovascular bundles. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Urinary incontinence 1 yr after surgery was measured as patient-reported use of pads. In different categories of surgical steps, we calculated the percentage of men changing pads "about once per 24 h" or more often. Relative risks were calculated as percentage ratios between categories. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: A strong association was found between the degree of bundle preservation and urinary incontinence 1 yr after surgery. We set the highest degree of bundle preservation (bilateral intrafascial dissection) as the reference category (relative risk = 1.0). For the men in the remaining six groups, ordered according to the degree of preservation, we obtained the following relative risks (95% confidence interval [CI]): 1.07 (0.63-1.83), 1.19 (0.77-1.85), 1.56 (0.99-2.45), 1.78 (1.13-2.81), 2.27 (1.45-3.53), and 2.37 (1.52-3.69). In the latter group, no preservation of any of the bundles was performed. The pattern was similar for preoperatively impotent men and for elderly men. Limitations of this analysis include the fact that noise influences the relative risks, due to variations between surgeons in the use of undocumented surgical steps of the procedure, variations in surgical experience and in how the surgical steps are reported, as well as variations in the metrics of patient-reported use of pads. CONCLUSIONS: We found that the degree of preservation of the two neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy predicts the rate of urinary incontinence 1 yr after the operation. According to our findings, preservation of both neurovascular bundles to avoid urinary incontinence is also meaningful for elderly and impotent men. PATIENT SUMMARY: We studied the degree of preservation of the two neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy and found that the risk of incontinence decreases if the surgeon preserves two bundles instead of one, and if the surgeon preserves some part of a bundle rather than not doing so.

Perioperative Outcomes of Robotic and Laparoscopic Simple Prostatectomy: A European-American Multi-institutional Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic and robotic simple prostatectomy (SP) have been introduced with the aim of reducing the morbidity of the standard open technique. OBJECTIVE: To report a large multi-institutional series of minimally invasive SP (MISP). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive cases of MISP done for the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) due to benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) between 2000 and 2014 at 23 participating institutions in the Americas and Europe were included in this retrospective analysis. INTERVENTION: Laparoscopic or robotic SP. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Demographic data and main perioperative outcomes were gathered and analyzed. A multivariable analysis was conducted to identify factors associated with a favorable trifecta outcome, arbitrarily defined as a combination of the following postoperative events: International Prostate Symptom Score <8, maximum flow rate >15ml/s, and no perioperative complications. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Overall, 1330 consecutive cases were analyzed, including 487 robotic (36.6%) and 843 laparoscopic (63.4%) SP cases. Median overall prostate volume was 100ml (range: 89-128). Median estimated blood loss was 200ml (range: 150-300). An intraoperative transfusion was required in 3.5% of cases, an intraoperative complication was recorded in 2.2% of cases, and the conversion rate was 3%. Median length of stay was 4 d (range: 3-5). On pathology, prostate cancer was found in 4% of cases. Overall postoperative complication rate was 10.6%, mostly of low grade. At a median follow-up of 12 mo, a significant improvement was observed for subjective and objective indicators of BOO. Trifecta outcome was not significantly influenced by the type of procedure (robotic vs laparoscopic; p=0.136; odds ratio [OR]: 1.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-2.9), whereas operative time (p=0.01; OR: 0.9; 95% CI, 0.9-1.0) and estimated blood loss (p=0.03; OR: 0.9; 95% CI, 0.9-1.0) were the only two significant factors. Retrospective study design, lack of a control arm, and limited follow-up represent major limitations of the present analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides the largest outcome analysis reported for MISP for BOO/BPE. These findings confirm that SP can be safely and effectively performed in a minimally invasive fashion in a variety of healthcare settings in which specific surgical expertise and technology is available. MISP can be considered a viable surgical treatment in cases of large prostatic adenomas. The use of robotic technology for this indication can be considered in centers that have a robotic program in place for other urologic indications. PATIENT SUMMARY: Analysis of a large data set from multiple institutions shows that surgical removal of symptomatic large prostatic adenomas can be carried out with good outcomes by using robot-assisted laparoscopy.