Safety and feasibility of outpatient robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Since its inception, robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has developed into a familiar surgical modality with improved perioperative outcomes including decreased hospital stay for localized prostate cancer patients. Experience with outpatient RARP has been reported as early as 2010. In this study, we evaluate the safety and feasibility of outpatient RARP by comparing perioperative outcomes between patients undergoing outpatient RARP to patients discharged on the day following surgery. This is a single-institution retrospective cohort study. Patients with localized disease who underwent RARP without pelvic lymph node dissection from September 2017 to January 2018 were included. T tests and Chi-squared analysis were used to compare demographic and perioperative characteristics of patients who were discharged on the same day of surgery (outpatient RARP) to patients discharged on the day after surgery (inpatient RARP). Of the 51 patients included in the study, 26 underwent outpatient RARP while 25 underwent inpatient RARP. There was no significant difference in mean age (61.4 vs 65.8 years, p = 0.05), BMI (27.1 vs 28.3 kg/m2, p = 0.35), ethnicity, tobacco use (8 vs 15%, p = 0.41), PSA (8.7 vs 8.4 ng/dL, p = 0.77), biopsy Gleason score distribution, prostate size (51.8 vs 57.7 cc, p = 0.26) or preoperative hemoglobin (14.3 vs 13.4 g/dL, p = 0.06), respectively. There was no significant difference between operative time (95.3 vs 101 min, p = 0.16), EBL (52.8 vs 66.5 cc, p = 0.08), postoperative change in hemoglobin (- 1 vs - 1.1 g/dL, p = 0.62), pathologic stage distribution or complication rate (4 vs 8%, p = 0.58) between patients who underwent outpatient vs inpatient RARP, respectively. Outpatient RARP offers similar or improved perioperative outcomes when compared to inpatient RARP. We advocate outpatient RARP as a safe and feasible alternative to inpatient RARP for appropriately selected prostate cancer patients. Furthermore, we introduce an outpatient model that can be applied to other institutions seeking to implement outpatient RARP.

Determining dosing intervals for luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonists based on serum testosterone levels: a prospective study.

PURPOSE: Long acting luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonists are the predominant form of androgen suppression in the treatment of prostate cancer with the goal of maintaining castrate levels of testosterone. Current dosing of luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonists does not include monitoring the end organ response of serum testosterone. Recent evidence suggests standard dosing regimens fail to achieve castrate levels of testosterone in some patients while in other patients testosterone can remain at castrate levels longer than the manufacturer recommended dosing interval. We prospectively evaluated patients with prostate cancer receiving luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonist hormonal therapy to determine the length of time that serum testosterone remains at or below castrate levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3-month dose of 22.5 mg leuprolide was administered to all patients as a first dose followed by a second dose 3 months later. Serum testosterone and prostate specific antigen were measured prospectively before starting hormonal therapy, after the first dose (12 weeks) and again following the second dose (24 weeks) to assess if castrate levels of testosterone (50 ng/dl or less) had been reached. At 24 weeks if patient serum testosterone was 50 ng/dl or less, then 22.5 mg leuprolide were not administered, and serum testosterone and prostate specific antigen were checked monthly. When serum testosterone was greater than 50 ng/dl a subsequent dose of 22.5 mg leuprolide was given. Serum testosterone and prostate specific antigen were then checked 3 months later and monthly thereafter until testosterone was greater than 50 ng/dl. Thus, the time that testosterone remained at castrate levels could be accurately established. RESULTS: From February 2003 to August 2005, 42 patients were treated in this manner with a median followup of 18 months (range 10 to 30). Average patient age was 77 years. Median Gleason grade was 7 (range 6 to 9). Median pretreatment prostate specific antigen was 15.1 ng/ml (range 0.6 to 433) and median posttreatment prostate specific antigen was 0.74 (less than 0.1 to 120). The median dosing interval was 6 months (range 5 to 12). Three patients had an increase in prostate specific antigen while receiving treatment despite castrate levels of testosterone. No patient required more frequent dosing than every 5 months. CONCLUSIONS: Testosterone based luteinizing hormone releasing hormone agonist therapy makes empirical sense. It represents continuous androgen ablation based on the patient physiological end point, namely testosterone. Early data suggest that using serum testosterone to guide luteinizing hormone releasing hormone dosing is safe, efficacious and cost-effective. By following end organ response, patients receive individualized care and more accurate androgen suppression therapy.

High-dose interleukin-2 immunotherapy is safe for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma on dialysis.

OBJECTIVE: To report our experience of high-dose interleukin-2 immunotherapy for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) on haemodialysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two anephric patients with metastatic RCC on haemodialysis received interleukin-2 (600,000 IU/kg) every 8 h for a maximum of 14 doses. The patients rested for 9 days and cycles were repeated as tolerated. A nephrologist followed the patients during treatment and they received nearly daily haemodialysis. RESULTS: These two cases were treated with high-dose interleukin-2 and had no unusual toxicity or adverse events. The first patient tolerated five, five, four, four and one dose of interleukin-2 over five cycles. He had a partial response to treatment with a decrease in size of a mediastinal mass, but ultimately developed progressive disease and died 32 months later. The second patient had four cycles of interleukin-2 (13, 13, 14 and nine doses). He initially maintained stable disease throughout treatment, but the disease ultimately progressed and he died 19 months later. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend considering high-dose interleukin-2 immunotherapy in highly selected dialysis patients with metastatic RCC. Further study is required to determine the safety, efficacy and optimum dosing in this group.

Use of rectus fascia graft for corporeal reconstruction during placement of penile implant.

OBJECTIVES: To report on the technique of using autologous rectus fascia graft for corporeal and tunica reconstruction during placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis. Reconstructing the corpora cavernosa and closing the tunica albuginea over an inflatable penile prosthesis can be challenging when severe fibrosis is encountered. METHODS: Fifteen patients with severe fibrosis of the corpora or tunica were included in this study. Eight patients had severe corporeal fibrosis secondary to an infected or malfunctioned penile prosthesis that had been previously removed, and seven had severe penile curvature secondary to tunical fibrosis with concomitant erectile dysfunction. All patients underwent corporeal or tunica reconstruction using autologous rectus fascia after placement of an inflatable penile prosthesis. Postoperatively, patients were evaluated at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months. Data on patient satisfaction, graft function, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 18 months (range 12 to 64), augmentation of the tunica or corporeal defect using autologous rectus fascia graft was successful in all patients. The penile prostheses were functioning properly with no evidence of graft infection, erosion, or abdominal wall hematoma. Patients demonstrated good results, with return to sexual intercourse at a mean of 9 weeks postoperatively (range 8 to 10). CONCLUSIONS: Use of an autologous rectus fascia graft for coverage of a tunical or corporeal defect during penile prosthesis placement in patients with corporeal or tunica fibrosis is surgically feasible, safe, and efficacious. Long-term follow-up of this reconstructive technique has demonstrated excellent clinical results with no morbidity related to the rectus fascia graft harvesting.