Effect of puboprostatic ligament preservation during robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy on early continence: Randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To prove the effectiveness of puboprostatic ligament-preserving robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical (RARP) on enhancing early continence. METHODS: Ninety-two patients with localized adenocarcinoma of the prostate scheduled for RARP from April 2018 to January 2019 were prospectively single-blinded and randomized into two groups, standard RARP (Group A) and puboprostatic ligament-sparing RARP (Group B). The outcomes were continent status at Foley catheter removal and 3 months after surgery using the score from the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF), pad usage, pathological margin status, blood loss, operative time, and complications. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were randomized (46 patients in each group), with a mean±SD age of 67.30±6.07 years. There were no differences in baseline characteristics. At 3 months after surgery, ICIQ-UI SF score (mean±SD) in Group A was significantly higher than Group B (8.74±4.28 vs. 6.93±3.96, p=0.038) but no difference at Foley catheter removal. Group A also had a significant higher score for interference with daily life (median [interquartile range, IQR]: 4 [1, 5] vs. 2 [0, 4]; p=0.041) and higher pad use (median [IQR]: 2 [0, 3] vs. 1 [1, 2]; p=0.041) at 3 months. One case in Group A had complete or severe incontinence (>5 pads/day) at 3 months. Groups A and B did not exhibit significant difference in margin status (p=0.828). There were no differences in operative time, blood loss, drain output or complications. CONCLUSIONS: Use of puboprostatic ligament-sparing RARP could be a method to accelerate early continence without affecting the final oncological outcome.

Radical prostatectomy outcomes in renal transplant recipients: a retrospective case series of Thai patients.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of prostate cancer in renal transplant recipients (RTR) is similar to the general population. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the standard of care in the management of clinically localized cancer, but is considered complicated due to the presence of adhesions, and the location of transplanted ureter/kidney. To date, a few case series or studies on RP in RTR have been published, especially in Asian patients. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety and report the experience with RP on RTR. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data of 1270 patients who underwent RP from January 2008 to March 2020, of which 5 patients were RTR. All available baseline characteristics, perioperative and postoperative data (operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), complications, length of hospital stay, complication), pathological stage, Gleason score, surgical margin status, and pre/postoperative creatinine were reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 5 RTR who underwent RPs (1 open radical prostatectomy (ORP), 1 laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), 2 robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies (RALRP), and 1 Retzius-sparing RALRP (RS-RALRP)) prostatectomy, the mean age (± SD) was 70 (± 5.62) years. In LRP and RALRP cases, the standard ports were moved slightly medially to prevent graft injury. The mean operative time ranged from 190 to 365 min. The longest operative time and highest EBL (630 ml) was the ORP case due to severe adhesion in Retzius space. For LRP and RALRP cases, the operative times seemed comparable and had EBL of ≤ 300 ml. All RPs were successful without any major intra-operative complication. There was no significant change in graft function. The restorations of urinary continence were within 1 month in RS-RALRP, approximately 6 months in RALRP, and about 1 year in ORP and LRP. Three patients with positive surgical margins had prostate-specific antigen (PSA) persistence at the first follow-up and 1 had later PSA recurrence. Two patients with negative margins were free from biochemical recurrence at 47 and 3 months after their RP. CONCLUSIONS: Our series suggested that all RP techniques are safe and feasible mode of treatment for localized prostate cancer in RTR.

Neoadjuvant Androgen Deprivation Therapy Effects on Perioperative Outcomes Prior to Radical Prostatectomy: Eleven Years of Experiences at Ramathibodi Hospital.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to demonstrate the efficacy of neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy (NADT) on perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent radical prostatectomy (RP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2008 to July 2018, we collected retrospective data of patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who underwent RP to assess their perioperative and pathological outcomes. The data included age, body mass index (BMI), serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, clinical stage, neoadjuvant ADT usage, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), perioperative complications, blood transfusion rate, adjacent organ injury rate, length of hospital stay, pathological stage, Gleason score (GS) of the biopsy and pathological specimen, specimen weight (g), and margin status. RESULTS: Of the 718 RPs performed, 138 (19.22%) were NADT and 580 (80.78%) were non-NADT. Patients who underwent NADT had a significant benefit in operative time (185 vs 195 mins), EBL (300 vs 500 mL) and specimen weight. These benefits were more obvious in non-low risk prostate cancer with less operative time, EBL, blood transfusion rate, length of hospital stay and specimen weight. However, the margin status and adjacent organ injury rate were similar in the NADT and non-NADT groups. CONCLUSION: NADT provides significantly better perioperative outcomes, especially in non-low risk prostate cancer, and has comparable pathological outcomes.

Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP in patients with prostate cancer based on risk groups.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative and pathological outcomes between robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) and LRP based on the patient's risk. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The medical records of 588 patients with prostate cancer who underwent RP, using minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques (240 LRP and 348 RALRP) by a single surgeon during January 2008 to June 2018 at the Ramathibodi Hospital, were retrospectively reviewed. The patient's risk was classified according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Guideline, 2018. The demographic, perioperative, and pathological data of patients were collected. The differences in perioperative and pathological outcomes between LRP and RALRP in each risk classification were assessed using chi-square, Fisher's exact tests and logistic regression, as appropriate. RESULTS: In terms of positive margins, RALRP had significant advantages in high-risk patients when compared to LRP (adjusted odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.26-0.84), while there were no differences in the low- and intermediate-risk patients. Overall, the patients who underwent RALRP had significant advantages over those who underwent LRP in terms of operative time, estimate blood loss, and blood transfusion rate. While, adjacent organ injury rate and length of hospital stay were similar for both techniques in all subgroup analyses. CONCLUSION: MIS techniques appear to be safe, especially RALRP, which has significantly better perioperative outcomes in all subgroups of patient risk classification, and in the high-risk patient group it seems to have better pathological outcomes when compared to LRP. ABBREVIATIONS: EBL: estimated blood loss; LOS: length of hospital stay; PSM: positive surgical margin; (L)(O)(RAL)RP: (laparoscopic) (open) (robot-assisted laparoscopic) radical prostatectomy; MIS: minimally invasive surgery.

Perioperative outcomes of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy: 10 years of cases at Ramathibodi Hospital.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the perioperative and pathological outcomes of open radical prostatectomy (ORP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP), and robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) at Ramathibodi Hospital within Mahidol University in Thailand. METHODS: From January 2008 to July 2017, 679 RPs were performed. Patients' data were collected retrospectively to evaluate their perioperative and pathological outcomes. This data included the age, body mass index (BMI), serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) level, clinical stage, Gleason score (GS) from biopsy, operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), perioperative complications, blood transfusion rate, adjacent organ injury rate, length of hospital stay, pathological stage, GS of the biopsy specimen, specimen weight (g), and marginal status of the patients. RESULTS: Of the 679 RPs performed, 128 (19.28%) were ORPs, 241 (36.30%) were LRPs, and 295 (44.43%) were RALRPs. Patients who underwent a RALRP had a significant advantage in EBL (1,600, 500, and 300 mL for ORPs, LRPs, and RALRPs, respectively), overall complications, and blood transfusion rate. As they are minimally invasive techniques, LRP and RALRP presented an advantage in terms of the length of hospital stay (an average of 9, 6, and 6 days for ORPs, LRPs, and RALRPs, respectively) and adjacent organ injury rate. ORPs also had the shortest operative time (160, 210, and 200 min for ORPs, LRPs, and RALRPs, respectively). However, the specimen weight and marginal status were similar in all of the techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive RP techniques, such as LRPs and RALRPs, appear to be safe, have significantly better perioperative outcomes than ORPs, and have comparable pathological outcomes to those of ORPs.