Study protocol for a prospective, multi-centered randomized controlled trial comparing pelvic fascia-sparing radical prostatectomy with conventional robotic-assisted prostatectomy: The PARTIAL trial

Long-term outcomes of pelvic-fascia sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard technique: Superior urinary function and quality of life without compromising oncologic efficacy in a single-surgeon series

BACKGROUND

Prostatic fascia-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (PFS-RARP) has improved short-term postoperative continence compared to standard prostatectomy (S-RARP) but long-term differences remain unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred two S-RARP followed by 239 PFS-RARPs were performed by a single surgeon. Univariate analyses were performed with t-test, χ2, Wilcoxon rank sum, Fisher exact, and analysis of variance (ANOVA). Regression models analyzed associates of EPIC-CP scores and oncologic outcomes. Cox proportional hazards modeling assessed postoperative continence. Primary outcomes included patient-reported urinary incontinence (UI) via EPIC-CP and continence rates. Secondary outcomes included EPIC-CP scores, positive surgical margins (PSM), and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Perioperative outcomes and time to continence were measured.

RESULTS

Median follow-up for PFS-RARP vs. S-RARP was 26 vs. 65 months. PFS-RARP demonstrated improved EPIC-CP UI and total scores at 24 months. On multivariate analysis, PFS-RARP was associated with improved EPIC-CP UI and total scores through 18 months, but not with PSM or BCR. PFS-RARP had a 39% and 66% reduced risk of incontinence using 0 and 0 to 1 pad-use definitions (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.39 - 0.95; HR:0.34, 95% CI 0.16 - 0.76). Continence returned faster with PFS-RARP (0 PPD: 91.0 days vs. 261 days, P < 0.001; 0-1 PPD: 32.7 days vs. 171 days, P < 0.001). There were no differences in PSM (35% vs. 25%, P = 0.064). There were more anterior PSM in PFS-RARP vs. S-RARP (47% vs. 26% P = 0.035), but no differences in BCR (16% vs. 22% P = 0.241).

CONCLUSIONS

PFS-RARP improves continence and patient-reported QOL up to 24 months postoperatively without compromising oncologic outcomes.

Surgical Management and Considerations for Patients with Localized High-Risk Prostate Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Localized high-risk (HR) prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogenous disease state with a wide range of presentations and outcomes. Historically, non-surgical management with radiotherapy and androgen deprivation therapy was the treatment option of choice. However, surgical resection with radical prostatectomy (RP) and pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) is increasingly utilized as a primary treatment modality for patients with HRPCa. Recent studies have demonstrated that surgery is an equivalent treatment option in select patients with the potential to avoid the side effects from androgen deprivation therapy and radiotherapy combined. Advances in imaging techniques and biomarkers have also improved staging and patient selection for surgical resection. Advances in robotic surgical technology grant surgeons various techniques to perform RP, even in patients with HR disease, which can reduce the morbidity of the procedure without sacrificing oncologic outcomes. Clinical trials are not only being performed to assess the safety and oncologic outcomes of these surgical techniques, but to also evaluate the role of surgical resection as a part of a multimodal treatment plan. Further research is needed to determine the ideal role of surgery to potentially provide a more personalized and tailored treatment plan for patients with localized HR PCa.