Risks and complications of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in patients receiving antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy: a retrospective cohort study in a single institute

The Safety Assessment of Continuation of Perioperative Antiplatelet Therapy in Elective Robotic Surgery for Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

Robotic surgery under condition of maintaining perioperative antiplatelet therapy (APT) is considered to have the risk of perioperative hemorrhagic events. We examined whether perioperative continuation of APT increased intraoperative blood loss and incidence of hemorrhagic complications in robot-assisted colorectal resection.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who underwent robotic surgical resection of colorectal cancer at our hospital between September 2020 and December 2023 were enrolled. Intraoperative blood loss, incidence of blood transfusion, and postoperative hemorrhagic complications were evaluated after dividing the study population into an APT group (patients receiving perioperative APT) and a non-APT group.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were included in the APT group and 65 patients were the non-APT group. All patients in the APT group were continued aspirin monotherapy until the day before the surgery. There were more anticoagulated patients in the non-APT group than in the APT-group (27.7% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.0496). Median intraoperative blood loss in the APT and non-APT group were 14 and 15 mL, respectively (p = 0.802). The incidence of intraoperative blood transfusion and postoperative hemorrhagic complication in the respective group were 0% and 4.6% (p = 0.553) and 0% and 1.5% (p = 1.00).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggested that perioperative continuation of APT will be allowed in robot-assisted colorectal resection in terms of safety.

Impact of oral antithrombotic agents on urinary continence recovery following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a preferred minimally invasive surgical treatment for prostate cancer. The number of elderly patients and those with cardiovascular and/or cerebrovascular issues undergoing surgery is increasing, and many of them are taking antithrombotic (AT) agents. However, the effect of AT agents on postoperative urinary recovery has not been adequately studied. In this study, we analyzed the differences in the postoperative recovery of urinary continence and oncological outcomes in patients undergoing RARP for localized prostate cancer between AT agent adherents and non-adherents.

METHODS

A total of 394 patients who underwent conventional anterior RARP between February 2015 and February 2021 were categorized into two groups: those taking oral AT agents (AT group) and the control group. Urinary continence recovery, complications, and oncological outcomes were compared between the groups. A Cox proportional hazards analysis was performed to identify clinical factors that affect urinary continence recovery.

RESULTS

The background data and bleeding complications did not differ significantly between the groups. The recovery of continence was significantly poorer in the AT group in terms of complete pad free (HR: 0.53 [95% CI: 0.39-0.71]) and use of ≤ 1 safety pad (HR: 0.74 [95% CI: 0.59-0.94]). The rate of anastomotic leakage on cystography was significantly higher in the AT group (20.9% vs. 6.7%). A univariate analysis revealed that taking antithrombotic agents, higher prostate-specific antigen levels, and a more advanced clinical stage were associated with a poor urinary continence recovery; a multivariate analysis showed that taking AT agents was an independent factor negatively associated with urinary continence recovery. There was no significant difference between the groups in the positive surgical margin rate (19.0% vs. 23.8%) or the biochemical-recurrence-free rate.

CONCLUSION

Taking oral AT agents may be associated with poor urinary continence recovery after RARP.

On the relationship between various anticoagulants and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a single-surgeon serial analysis

Prostate cancer patients often have other health conditions and take anticoagulants. It was believed that surgery under anticoagulants could worsen surgical results. This study aims to explore the safety of robot-assisted prostatectomy in anticoagulated patients, without any exclusion criteria. The study included 500 patients who underwent RARP by a single surgeon between April 2019 and August 2022. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1, consisting of 376 men (75.2%), did not receive any anticoagulation, while Group 2, with 124 patients (24.8%), received different forms of anticoagulation. Then, the anticoagulation group was divided into 4 subgroups according to their definite anticoagulation: the aspirin 15.6%, new oral anticoagulants (NOAC) 5.4%, Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) 2%, and dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) 1.8% subgroup. Postoperative complications and readmission rates were compared between the two study groups and subgroups. Patients in the combined group 2 were older and they also carried more comorbidities compared to men in group 1 (p = 0.03, p = 0.001).The study groups had similar oncological results, with 40.4% of patients having locally advanced cancers. Catheter days were longer in the anticoagulation group (4.5 vs 4 days, p = 0.001). No significant differences were observed between study groups for overall, minor, and major complications (p = 0.160, 0.100, and 0.915, respectively). In addition, readmissions were low (5.6%) and similar between the study groups (p = 0.635). Under cautious management, RARP under diverse anticoagulation regimes is safe and has comparable results to men with no medications. Further prospective studies must be conducted to confirm our findings.

A comparative study of anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy among men undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective single institution study

The present study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) under anticoagulant (AC) and/or antiplatelet (AP) therapy, as compared to a control group, and to establish possible differences in postoperative-related morbidity. Data of all consecutive patients submitted to elective RARP for PCa from June 2017 to May 2020 at our institution were prospectively collected. Patients were divided according to the use of AC/AP therapy at surgery. The primary endpoint was to determine differences in 90-day postoperative complication rate, while secondary endpoints included differences in transfusion rate, readmission rate and postoperative oncological outcomes between the two groups. Sub-groups analysis was separately performed for patients undergoing pelvic lymphadenectomy and nerve-sparing procedures. Overall, 822 patients were included in the study and divided in 704 control-group patients (group A) and 118 patients under AC/AP therapy at surgery (group B). Despite the higher estimated blood loss between AC/AP takers and the control group, we did not find a significant difference in terms of 90-day postoperative complication rate, transfusion rate, readmission rate and postoperative oncological outcomes (all p > 0.05). In the cohort of patients undergoing nerve-sparing prostatectomy, a higher rate of complications and transfusions were found. At multivariate analysis, ASA score and ongoing medications were independently associated with complication in this sub-group. RARP can be safely and effectively performed in patients with PCa and ongoing AC/AP agents. Attention has to be paid in candidates for nerve-sparing procedures.