Early removal of urethral catheter with suprapubic tube drainage versus urethral catheter drainage alone after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Radical prostatectomy using the Hinotori robot-assisted surgical system: Docking-free design may contribute to reduction in postoperative pain

BACKGROUND

The docking-free design of the Japanese Hinotori surgical robotic system allows the robotic arm to avoid trocar grasping, thereby minimising excessive abdominal wall stress. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) using the Hinotori system and to explore the potential contribution of its docking-free design to postoperative pain reduction.

METHODS

This study reviewed the clinical records of 94 patients who underwent RARP: 48 patients in the Hinotori group and 46 in the da Vinci Xi group.

RESULTS

Hinotori group had significantly longer operative and console times (p = 0.030 and p = 0.029, respectively). Perioperative complications and oncologic outcomes did not differ between the two groups. On postoperative day 4, the rate of decline from the maximum visual analogue scale score was marginally significant in the Hinotori group (p = 0.062).

CONCLUSIONS

The docking-free design may contribute to reducing postoperative pain.

Is Urethral Catheterization Necessary in Retzius-sparing Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy?

OBJECTIVE

To analyze whether urethral catheter (UC)-free anastomosis during Retzius-sparing radical prostatectomy (RP) results in worsening immediate perioperative and postoperative complications.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed records of patients undergoing robotic-assisted RP with or without indwelling UC placement by a single surgeon between January 2020 and March 2022. Clinical and pathological characteristics were evaluated. An independent t-test was used to compare continuous variables, and Pearson's chi-square test or Fisher exact test was used to compare categorical variables.

RESULTS

One hundred fifteen patients underwent robotic prostatectomy from January 2020 to June 2022. Sixty-two patients had both a UC for 12 hours postoperatively and a suprapubic catheter for 6days, while in 53 patients a UC was omitted. There was no significant difference noted between the groups regarding age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiology score, prostate-specific antigen, stage, node status, or positive margins. There were no significant differences in the rates of anastomotic leak, ileus, or urethral stricture. Patients had a significantly higher pad-free rate in the suprapubic catheter-only group (P = .04) at 3months. There was no difference in average number of pads used or the number using more than 1 pad/day.

CONCLUSION

Omission of urethral catheterization during Retzius-sparing RP is safe and doesn't result in an increased risk in perioperative or postoperative complications, but rather appears to be associated with a significantly improved 3-month pad-free rate.

Effect of different catheter pathways on wounds after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis

Prostate cancer is one of the most common malignancies worldwide and the fifth leading cause of cancer deaths in men. With the rapidly increasing surgical rate of minimally invasive radical prostatectomy, there is still controversy about how to use a urinary catheter post-operatively. Thus, we attempted to compare the post-operative wound-related outcomes through a meta-analysis of urethral catheterisation (UC) versus suprapubic catheterisation (SPC) after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. As of August 2023, the authors conducted systematic searches in databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The authors reviewed the relevant literature separately to determine comparisons between SPC and UC treatment after radical prostatectomy. A total of 395 subjects were enrolled in the five trials, met the eligibility criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Data collection and analysis revealed significant differences in catheter bother to patients for surgical trauma (MD, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.48, 1.48 p = 0.0001), with SPC causing less catheter bother to patients post-operatively; post-operative catheter-related problems (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 0.03, 326.1 p = 0.61), the POD1 of the post-operative period (MD, - 0.09; 95% CI, -0.75, 0.94 p = 0.83) and the POD3 of the post-operative period (MD, -0.49; 95% CI, -0.99, 0.01 p = 0.06); there was no statistically significant difference in wound pain. Compared with UC, SPC patients had less post-operative catheter distress. Thus, SPC is more beneficial in reducing post-operative wound discomfort in patients. The validity of the results remains to be tested in more and better studies.

Omitting routine cystography after RARP: Analysis of complications and readmission rates in suprapubic and transurethral drained patients

OBJECTIVES

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has become the therapy of choice for local treatment of prostate cancer. Postoperatively, urologists perform cystography before removing urinary catheters due to concerns about the integrity of the vesicourethral anastomosis. This study aims to evaluate the safety of waiving cystography before early catheter removal after RARP.

METHODS

A total of 514 patients from two tertiary referral centers who underwent RARP were retrospectively included. Patients received postoperative urinary drainage by transurethral (TUC) or suprapubic catheter (SPC). During the first year, both centers performed routine cystography before removing TUC or SPC on postoperative day 5. In the following year, management changed and catheters were removed without cystography unless indicated by the surgeon. Demographic and perioperative data were analyzed. Postoperative complications and readmission rates were compared between standard cystography (StCG), no cystography (NCG), and selective cystography (SCG).

RESULTS

Groups were comparable regarding demographic and oncological parameters. Analysis showed no significant difference regarding major complications and readmission rates between standard and no cystography (p = 0.155 and 0.998 respectively). Omitting routine cystography did not lead to inferior postoperative courses regardless of both urinary drainage used and tumor stage. Subgroup analysis showed an increase of major complications in SCG patients when compared with NCG (p = 0.003) while readmissions remained comparable (p = 0.554).

CONCLUSION

Waiving routine cystography before early catheter removal after RARP appears to be safe and feasible regardless of urinary drainage. However, the selective cystogram at the surgeon's request still plays a role in monitoring patients with an elevated risk profile.

Variations in Opioid Use Following Robotic Radical Prostatectomy in South Florida

Introduction: Opioid dependency has been a persistent issue in the United States over the past two decades. Increased efforts have been made to reduce opioid prescribing. Our objective was to quantify at-home opioid requirements following radical prostatectomy. Methods: Written questionnaires were administered to patients 1 week following robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). Patients provided data on opioid use, pain levels, and demographic characteristics. Results: Sixty-five patients were included. Median age (interquartile range [IQR]) was 69 (62-72) years. The majority were white (85%) and hispanic (67%). Prescriptions ranged from 6 to 15 pills of 5-mg oxycodone equivalents. Twenty-two percent (145/663) of the prescribed pills in the study were consumed. Fifty-four percent (35/65) of patients did not take opioids. Of the 30 patients who took opioids, median use (IQR) was 4.5 (3-6) pills. Forty-six percent (30/65) reported catheter-related pain. Patients who took opioids reported higher levels of pain. On generalized linear regression, younger age, lower levels of education, and living with a family member were factors associated with increased risk for opioid use (all p < 0.05). Conclusions: Despite the Florida Department of Health's restriction on narcotic prescriptions to 3-day supplies, opioids are still overprescribed in our region. The majority of patients do not require opioids after RALP, and patients who do require an opioid analgesic can be adequately managed with less than 6 pills of 5-mg oxycodone equivalents.

PROSPECT guidelines update for evidence-based pain management after prostatectomy for cancer

The aim of this review was to update the recommendations for optimal pain management after open and laparoscopic or robotic prostatectomy. Optimal pain management is known to influence postoperative recovery, but patients undergoing open radical prostatectomy typically experience moderate dynamic pain in the immediate postoperative day. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic surgery may be associated with decreased pain levels as opposed to open surgery. We performed a systematic review using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) with PROcedure SPECific Postoperative Pain ManagemenT (PROSPECT) methodology. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English language, from January 2015 until March 2020, assessing postoperative pain, using analgesic, anaesthetic and surgical interventions, were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases. Of the 1797 studies identified, 35 RCTs and 3 meta-analyses met our inclusion criteria. NSAIDs and COX-2 selective inhibitors proved to lower postoperative pain scores. Continuous intravenous lidocaine reduced postoperative pain scores during open surgery. Local wound infiltration showed positive results in open surgery. Bilateral transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block was performed at the end of surgery and lowered pain scores in robot-assisted procedures, but results were conflicting for open procedures. Basic analgesia for prostatic surgery should include paracetamol and NSAIDs or COX-2 selective inhibitors. TAP block should be recommended as the first-choice regional analgesic technique for laparoscopic/robotic radical prostatectomy. Intravenous lidocaine should be considered for open surgeries.

Suprapubic Versus Urethral Catheter for Urinary Drainage After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To review the evidence regarding the usage of suprapubic tube (SPT) versus indwelling urethral catheter (IUC) after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).

RECENT FINDINGS

Available data on the use of SPT for urinary drainage after RARP is somewhat limited mostly because of the variations of study designs and non-standardized outcomes. Although it may provide some mild benefit in terms of catheter-related pain and discomfort, the benefit seems not to be clinically significant. The evidence in the literature so far does not support routine usage of SPT as the primary urinary drainage method after RARP. Further higher-quality studies that can show clinically significant advantages over IUC are still needed to justify its usage.

Superior early and long-term continence following early micturition on day 2 after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a randomized prospective trial

PURPOSE

To elucidate early and long-term continence and patient comfort depending on type and duration of catheterization after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

METHODS

198 patients were randomized prospectively into three groups (May 2016-July 2017): A transurethral catheter with micturition on postoperative day (POD) 5 was placed in the control group (TD5); a suprapubic tube (SPT) with micturition on POD 5 was placed in the group SD5 or with micturition on POD 2 in group SD2, respectively. Questionnaires were used for catheter-related satisfaction. Functional outcome analysis included residual volume analysis, uroflowmetry, IPSS, 12-h pad test, and daily pad use. Follow-up was conducted up to 12 months.

RESULTS

Postoperative comfort and catheter-related complications were similar in the three groups. However, on the day of catheter removal, continence was significantly better in the 12-h pad test for the SD2 group with 14 ml vs. 30 ml (TD5) and 24 ml (SD5), p = 0.007. Median residual urine volume between the groups was comparable with 17 ml in TD5, 7 ml in SD5, and 11 ml in SD2, (p = 0.07). Postoperative IPSS did not differ significantly in the follow-up period. After 4 weeks, 63% of the patients in SD2 were continent (no pad/day) compared to 33% in TD5 and 41% in SD5, p = 0.004. After 12 months, 76% were continent in TD5, 87% in SD5, and 94% in SD2, p = 0.023.

CONCLUSIONS

Early micturition after SPT placement in robotic radical prostatectomy seems to be beneficial without an increased risk of complications.

The comparison of transurethral versus suprapubic catheter after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The transurethral catheter (TUC) or supra-pubic catheter is commonly used after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). However, the best way of urine drainage after the operation is still controversial.

Methods

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Cochrane, Web of Science databases and the reference lists of relevant articles was performed up to July 2019. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed based on all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective studies assessing the two techniques.

Results

In total, nine studies (1,121 patients) were eligible, including three RCTs, one prospective and five retrospective studies. After RARP, postoperative pain was less in suprapubic catheter (SPC) group than TC group, both within 3 days [mean difference (MD): -0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.37 to -0.02; P=0.04] and 5 days after operation (MD: -0.96; 95% CI: -1.39 to -0.52; P<0.00001). There was no significant difference between SPC and TUC groups, in operation time (MD: 2.58; 95% CI: -5.82 to 10.97; P=0.55) and at rates of both catheterization-associated complication [odds ratio (OR): 1.05; 95% CI: 0.67 to 1.64; P=0.83] and long-term urinary incontinence (OR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.42 to 1.12; P=0.13).

Conclusions

Patients in SPC group suffer from less postoperative pain compared with the TUC group. SPC can be a better alternate of TUC.

Pain and discomfort after Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a comparative study between suprapubic cystostomy and urethral catheter as urinary drainage

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to evaluate differences in discomfort, complications and functional results after Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) according to different urinary drainage: suprapubic tube (SPT) and standard urethral catheter (UC).

METHODS

Prospective, comparative, consecutive, non-randomized study. In all patients with a water-tight anastomosis, no hematuria, obesity, previous suprapubic surgery or history of bladder cancer, a SPT (two-way Foley 14-Fr catheter) was positioned instead of a Foley 18-Fr UC. One week after surgery, an institutional self-compiled questionnaire was administered. The patients were divided into two groups according to the presence of UC or SPT and were compared concerning pain, perioperative results, complications, functional outcomes.

RESULTS

Fifty-six patients with UC and 135 with SPT agreed to participate to the study. Median postoperative pain score was 3 (IQR: 2-5) in UC and 3 (IQR: 1-5) in SPT group (P=0.324); urinary drain-related pain scores were 3 (IQR: 1-5) in UC and 1 (IQR: 0-3) in SPT groups (P<0.001); catheter removal related scores were 1 (IQR: 0-3) and 1 (IQR: 1-3) (P=0.317), respectively. Lastly, 17.8% (UC) and 31.1% (SPT) wore a protection (small or medium pad) while the urinary drainage was in place (P=0.061). No differences related to complications were found (P=0.085); 7.9% of patients in UC group and 4.2% in SPT group (P=0.178) used pads one year after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated suprapubic tube to be more comfortable than transurethral catheter after RARP, with a possible advantage concerning anastomotic postoperative problems.

Supra-pubic versus urethral catheter after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: systematic review of current evidence

PURPOSE

To provide latest evidence on the use of suprapubic catheter (SPC) versus urethral catheter (UC) after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic revision of literature was performed up to September 2017 using different search engines (Pubmed, Ovid, Scopus) to identified studies comparing the use of SPC versus standard UC after RARP. Identification and selection of the studies were conducted according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis criteria. For continuous outcomes, the weighted mean difference (WMD) was used as a summary measure, whereas the odds ratio (OR) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated for binary variables. RR was preferred in cases of a high number of events to avoid overestimation. Pooled estimates were calculated using the random-effect model to account for clinical heterogeneity. All statistical analyses were performed using Review manager 5 (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).

RESULTS

Eight studies were identified and included in this systematic review, namely 3 RCTs, 4 non-randomized prospective studies, and one retrospective study. A total of 966 RARP cases were collected for the cumulative analysis. Among them, 492 patients received standard UC and 474 SPC placement after RARP. UC patients had higher baseline PSA (WMD 0.44 ng/ml; p = 0.02). Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score was found to be significantly lower in patients with SPC at postoperative day 7 (WMD 0.53; 95% CI 0.13-0.93; p = 0.009). Regarding penile pain, a significant difference in favor of the SPC group was found at postoperative day 7 assessment (WMD 1.2; 95% CI 0.82-1.6; p < 0.001). More patients in the SPC group reported "not at all" or "minimal pain" at this time point (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06, 0.44; p < 0.001). No significant differences were found in terms of continence recovery rate at 6-12 weeks between the groups (UC 78.7%, 88.2%; RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84, 1.01; p = 0.09). Similarly, no differences were found in terms of catheter-related issues (p = 0.17). However, UC patients had lower likelihood of overall complications (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21-0.89, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence suggests that the use of SPC can be a viable option for postoperative urine drainage after RARP, as it can translate into decreased postoperative pain without carrying a significant higher risk of catheter-related complications. Further investigation seems to be warranted, ideally within the framework of a multicentre randomized study with standardized analysis of outcomes.

Suprapubic tube versus urethral catheter drainage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Prostate cancer is one of the most common cancers in the elderly population. The standard treatment is radical prostatectomy (RARP). However, urologists do not have consents on the postoperative urine drainage management (suprapubic tube (ST)/ urethral catheter (UC)). Thus, we try to compare ST drainage to UC drainage after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy regarding to comfort, recovery rate and continence using the method of meta-analysis.

Methods

A systematic search was performed in Dec. 2017 on PubMed, Medline, Embase and Cochrane Library databases. The authors independently reviewed the records to identify studies comparing ST with UC of patients underwent RARP. Meta-analysis was performed using the extracted data from the selected studies.

Results

Seven studies, including 3 RCTs, with a total of 946 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in our meta-analysis. Though there was no significant difference between the ST group and the UC group on postoperative pain (RR1.73, P 0.20), our study showed a significant improvement on bother or discomfort, defined as trouble in hygiene and sleep, caused by catheter when compared two groups at postoperative day (POD) 7 in ST group (RR2.05, P 0.006). There was no significant difference between the ST group and UC group on urinary continence (RR0.98, P 0.74) and emergency department visit (RR0.61, P 0.11). The rates of bladder neck contracture and other complications were very low in both groups.

Conclusion

Compared to UC, ST showed a weak advantage. So it might be a good choice to choose ST over RARP.

Removing the urinary catheter on post-operative day 2 after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a feasibility study from a single high-volume referral centre

The indwelling urinary catheter (UC) is a significant bother for men after radical prostatectomy (RP) and should be removed as soon as possible without jeopardizing the outcome. Our aim was to assess the feasibility and safety of its removal on postoperative day (POD) 2 after robot-assisted laparoscopic RP (RALP). A consecutive series of patients undergoing RALP for localized prostate cancer (PCa) were prospectively enrolled. Inclusion criteria were: no bladder-neck reconstruction, watertight urethrovesical anastomosis at 150 ml filling, ≤ 200 ml of intraoperative bleeding, ≤ 80 ml of fluid from the drain on POD 1, clear urine from the UC on POD 2. Patients were discharged on POD 2. Continence was assessed at catheter removal and 1, 3 and 6 months after surgery. Urethrovesical anastomosis was performed with a standard technique on 3 layers. Sixty-six patients were enrolled. The UC was removed on POD 2 in all the cases and 96.4% of the patients were discharged on POD 2. Re-catheterization was needed 16 times and it was always performed easily. Twenty-four complications were reported by 20 patients, mostly Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade II; 2 CD IIIB complications were observed. No anastomotic strictures were diagnosed. At catheter removal, 29% of the patients were completely continent, 41% at 1 month, 67% at 3 months and 92% at 6 months. In selected patients, removing the UC 48 h after RALP is feasible and safe and has no negative impact on continence if compared with the best international standards.

Postoperative patient comfort in suprapubic drainage versus transurethral catheterization following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of the type of urinary diversion (suprapubic vs. transurethral catheterization) on patients' postoperative pain after radical prostatectomy, development of bacteriuria and long-term functional results.

METHODS

A randomized, prospective clinical trial was performed including 160 patients who underwent robot-assisted radical prostatectomy after randomization into two groups: intraoperatively, a transurethral catheter (control group) or an additional suprapubic tube (with removal of the transurethral catheter in the morning of postoperative day 1; intervention group) was placed. Primary study endpoint was postoperative pain objectified by the numeric rating scale questionnaire. Secondary endpoints were bacteriuria after catheter removal and functional outcomes after up to 2 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographic and perioperative data. Starting on postoperative day 2, patients in the suprapubic diversion group had significantly less pain on every time point preceding the removal of the catheter compared to the control cohort with a median overall numeric rating score on postoperative day 1-4 of 2.4 points in the transurethral versus 1.3 in the intervention group (p = 0.012). No statistical difference was found in postoperative bacteriuria and complications as well as in functional results, quality of life and incontinence rates after a median follow-up of 22 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Suprapubic drainage in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy shows significantly decreased pain levels during the catheterization period compared to the transurethral diversion without compromising long-term functional results. Intraoperative placement of a suprapubic tube should be discussed as a standard procedure for further improvement of patients' postoperative comfort.

Urethral (indwelling or intermittent) or suprapubic routes for short-term catheterisation in hospitalised adults

BACKGROUND

Indwelling urethral catheters are often used for bladder drainage in hospital. Urinary tract infection is the most common hospital-acquired infection, and a common complication of urinary catheterisation. Pain, ease of use and quality of life are important to consider, as well as formal economic analysis. Suprapubic catheterisation can also result in bowel perforation and death.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the advantages and disadvantages of alternative routes of short-term bladder catheterisation in adults in terms of infection, adverse events, replacement, duration of use, participant satisfaction and cost effectiveness. For the purpose of this review, we define 'short-term' as intended duration of catheterisation for 14 days or less.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Incontinence Group Specialised Register, which contains trials identified from the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP and handsearching of journals and conference proceedings (searched 26 February 2015), CINAHL (searched 27 January 2015) and the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised and quasi-randomised trials comparing different routes of catheterisation for short-term use in hospitalised adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors extracted data and performed 'Risk of bias' assessment of the included trials. We sought clarification from the trialists if further information was required.

MAIN RESULTS

In this systematic review, we included 42 trials.Twenty-five trials compared indwelling urethral and suprapubic catheterisation. There was insufficient evidence for symptomatic urinary tract infection (risk ratio (RR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.69; 5 trials, 575 participants; very low-quality evidence). Participants with indwelling catheters had more cases of asymptomatic bacteriuria (RR 2.25, 95% CI 1.63 to 3.10; 19 trials, 1894 participants; very low quality evidence) and more participants reported pain (RR 5.62, 95% CI 3.31 to 9.55; 4 trials, 535 participants; low-quality evidence). Duration of catheterisation was shorter in the indwelling urethral catheter group (MD -1.73, 95% CI -2.42 to -1.05; 2 trials, 274 participants).Fourteen trials compared indwelling urethral catheterisation with intermittent catheterisation. Two trials had data for symptomatic UTI which were suitable for meta-analysis. Due to evidence of significant clinical and statistical heterogeneity, we did not pool the results, which were inconclusive and the quality of evidence was very low. The main source of heterogeneity was the reason for hospitalisation as Hakvoort and colleagues recruited participants undergoing urogenital surgery; whereas in the trial conducted by Tang and colleagues elderly women in geriatric rehabilitation ward were recruited. The evidence was also inconclusive for asymptomatic bacteriuria (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.85 to 1.28; 13 trials, 1333 participants; very low quality evidence). Almost three times as many people developed acute urinary retention with the intermittent catheter (16% with urethral versus 45% with intermittent); RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.91; 4 trials, 384 participants.Three trials compared intermittent catheterisation with suprapubic catheterisation, with only female participants. The evidence was inconclusive for symptomatic urinary tract infection, asymptomatic bacteriuria, pain or cost.None of the trials reported the following critical outcomes: quality of life; ease of use, and cost utility analysis.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Suprapubic catheters reduced the number of participants with asymptomatic bacteriuria, recatheterisation and pain compared with indwelling urethral. The evidence for symptomatic urinary tract infection was inconclusive.For indwelling versus intermittent urethral catheterisation, the evidence was inconclusive for symptomatic urinary tract infection and asymptomatic bacteriuria. No trials reported pain.The evidence was inconclusive for suprapubic versus intermittent urethral catheterisation. Trials should use a standardised definition for symptomatic urinary tract infection. Further adequately-powered trials comparing all catheters are required, particularly suprapubic and intermittent urethral catheterisation.

An Assessment of Patient Comfort and Morbidity After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy with Suprapubic Tube Versus Urethral Catheter Drainage

OBJECTIVE

Robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) with suprapubic tube (SPT), compared to urethral catheter (UC) drainage, has been proposed to improve patient comfort and recovery. We sought to compare short-term outcomes for pain and morbidity after RALP with SPT vs UC drainage.

METHODS

Between August 2012 and 2014, 159 men underwent a RALP and prospectively completed a questionnaire addressing postoperative pain and satisfaction. Group 1 (n = 94) underwent a RALP by one surgeon who placed a UC and removed it between postoperative day (POD) 7 and 10. Group 2 (n = 65) underwent a RALP by a different surgeon who placed an SPT and UC. On POD 1, the UC was removed. On POD 9, the SPT was capped and removed on POD 11 if the patient was voiding adequately. Preoperative and intraoperative data, complications, questionnaires, and patient-reported morbidity, including unplanned telephone calls and emergency department (ED) visits, were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics were similar between groups. One week after surgery, the penile pain score was statistically significantly lower in Group 2 compared to Group 1 (56.9% and 79.8%, respectively, reported minimal-to-moderate pain, p = 0.003). Bladder spasms and overall pain were not significantly higher for Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p > 0.05). When asked "How big a problem has your urine storage device been?," 20.2% of patients in Group 1 reported it as a "moderate-to-big" problem compared to 10.8% in Group 2 (p > 0.05). The number of catheter-related unplanned telephone encounters did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.7), however, although not statistically significant, 4.6% of patients in Group 2 presented to the ED with catheter-related issues (p = 0.07).

CONCLUSION

SPT after RALP was associated with less penile pain compared to UC drainage, and modestly better patient satisfaction. There were no significant differences in bladder spasms, overall pain, and patient-reported morbidity between groups.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: An update on functional and oncologic outcomes, techniques, and advancements in technology

The robotic platform has revolutionized the management of prostate cancer over the last 15 years. Several techniques have been developed to improve functional and oncologic outcomes, including meticulous apical and posterior dissection, nerve sparing techniques, bladder neck and urethral length sparing, and anastomotic reconstruction. Future developments involving novel single-site, robotic technology will undoubtedly further the field of minimally invasive urology. These topics are reviewed within this article.