Laparoscopic simple prostatectomy: a large single-center prospective cohort study

Waterjet ablation therapy vs. urethral-sparing robot-assisted simple prostatectomy for large prostate volumes (>80 mL): results of a retrospective multicentric series according to the standardized BPH6 achievement

BACKGROUND

The introduction of minimally invasive techniques for BPH treatment aimed to balance de-obstruction with maintenance of ejaculatory function. The aim of this multicentric series was to compare outcomes of waterjet ablation therapy (WAT) versus urethral-sparing robot assisted simple prostatectomy (us-RASP) for large prostate volumes (PV>80 mL) according to BPH-6 metric.

METHODS

Four institutional BPH datasets were matched and queried for "PV>80 mL" (N.=86), "WAT" (Group A; N.=42) and "us-RASP" (Group B; N.=44). Baseline, perioperative and functional data according to BPH6 composite endpoint were compared between groups. Differences between continuous variables were assessed with t-test or Mann-Whitney U-test depending on their normal or not normal distribution, while Chi-square Test was used for categorical data. A two-sided P<0.05 was considered significant.

RESULTS

Patients treated with WAT showed lower preoperative PSA median values (3.5 vs. 7.07 ng/mL) (P<0.05). Regarding perioperative outcomes, patients treated with us-RASP revealed increased median operative time (110 vs. 70 mins), prolonged bladder irrigation time (24 vs. 37.2 hours), longer median hospital stay (5 vs. 4 days), respectively (all P<0.05). At a median follow-up of 43.7 months (IQR 33.8-49.7), the BPH6 achievement rate was comparable between groups (54.7% vs. 56.8%; P=0.964). In the WAT series 1-year ejaculatory dysfunction rate was 19.1% while in the us-RASP cohort was 13.6%, respectively (P=0.21). Retrospective design and the lack of a propensity-score matching represent main limitations of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to us-RASP, WAT showed comparable symptom relief and ejaculatory function preservation for prostate gland >80 mL with benefit in terms of main perioperative outcomes at mid-term follow-up.

Novel composite BPH3 trifecta for robotic assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) versus BPH6: A multicenter outcomes comparison

OBJECTIVES

To assess disobstructive proficiency of BPH3 trifecta in RASP according to different techniques.

METHODS

Baseline prostate volume (PV), uroflowmetry parameters and Validated questionnaires: IIEF, Incontinence severity index score (ISI), International prostatic symptoms score (IPSS), MSHQ, Quality of recovery (QOR), were recorded preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. RASP was conducted using both the urethra-sparing (Madigan) technique and a non-urethral-sparing transvesical (Freyer) approach. Two groups were evaluated for achievement rates in terms of BPH-3 and BPH-6. BPH-3 was defined by a combination of: a reduction of ⩾30% in IPSS compared to baseline, ISI score ⩽ 4, and absence of complications beyond Clavien grade 1.

RESULTS

About 158 patients underwent RASP, with 93 undergoing the Madigan procedure and 65 the Freyer approach. Patients in the Madigan group were younger, with lower PV, baseline IPSS score, overactive symptoms (ISI score), but higher MSHQ and IIEF score, when compared to the Freyer population (all p < 0.02). At 12-month follow-up, patients who underwent the Madigan procedure reported shorter bladder irrigation time and time to catheter removal (both p < 0.001). As expected, Madigan patients also demonstrated superior postoperative IIEF and MSHQ scores (all p < 0.001). Postoperative complication incidence was higher in the Madigan cohort, mainly due to UTI (p < 0.001). Although there were no differences in postoperative IPSS and Q-max between groups, the Madigan cohort presented with higher post void residue (p < 0.001). BPH6 achievement was higher in the Madigan cohort (48% vs 28%) (p < 0.001), while no difference was observed in BPH3 achievement rate.

CONCLUSION

The BPH3 composite trifecta appears to be more suitable than BPH6 in assessing the proficiency in disobstructive symptoms relief after RASP.

Incidental prostate carcinoma after single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy: a multi-institutional report (SPARC)

BACKGROUND

Single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy is a minimally invasive alternative for patients with large benign prostatic hyperplasia with severe symptoms and/or failure of medical treatment. In recent literature, the rate of incidental prostate cancer after simple prostatectomy ranges from 1.8% to 13.0%. Our objective is to report the rate of incidental prostate cancer after single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy and to compare our findings to other approaches.

METHODS

A Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium [SPARC] multi-institutional retrospective analysis of all initial consecutive single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy cases performed from 2019 to 2023 by eleven surgeons from six centers. Our primary outcome was the rate of incidental prostate cancer in adenoma specimens. We used descriptive statistics to analyze the data.

RESULTS

A total of 235 cases were performed successfully without conversions or additional ports. Eleven patients (4.6%) were found to have incidental prostate cancer on pathological analysis. The median percentage of tissue involved by the tumor was 5%. The overall rate of clinically significant prostate cancer was 2.1%. Most cases were Gleason Grade Group 1 (55%). Those with Grade Group ≤3 were subsequently managed with active surveillance with a median follow-up of 17 months. A patient with Gleason Grade Group 4 underwent an uncomplicated multi-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy with satisfactory functional and oncological outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Initial multi-institutional experience with single-port robot-assisted simple prostatectomy showed an incidental prostate cancer rate of 4.6%, comparable to MP, laparoscopic, and open techniques.

Urethral-sparing laparoscopic simple prostatectomy for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia with asymptomatic urethral stricture after urethral stricture surgery

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of urethral-sparing laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (US-LSP) for the treatment of large-volume (>80 ml) benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with asymptomatic urethral stricture (urethral lumen > 16 Fr) after urethral stricture surgery.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 39 large-volume BPH patients with asymptomatic urethral stricture after urethral stricture surgery who underwent US-LSP from January 2016 to October 2021. Postoperative follow-ups were scheduled at 1, 3, and 6 months.

RESULTS

All patients affected by significant BPH-related lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) including 22 cases with asymptomatic anterior urethral stricture and 17 cases with asymptomatic posterior urethral stricture. Median operative time was 118 min (interquartile range [IQR]100-145). Median estimated blood loss was 224 ml (IQR: 190-255). 33 patients(84.6%) avoided continuous bladder irrigation. Postoperative complications occurred in 5 patients (12.8%), including 4 cases with Clavien-Dindo grade 1 and grade 2 and 1 case with grade 3a. During follow-up, US-LSP presented statistically significant improvements in LUTS compared to baseline (P < 0.05). A total of 25 patients had normal ejaculation preoperatively and 3 patients (12%) complained retrograde ejaculation postoperatively. Two patients (5.1%) reported stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and no patient reported aggravated urethral stricture during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

US-LSP was safe and effective in treating large-volume BPH with asymptomatic urethral stricture after urethral stricture surgery. Meanwhile, US-LSP could reduce the risk of SUI in patients with asymptomatic posterior urethral stricture and maintain ejaculatory function in a high percentage of patients.

Robotic assisted simple prostatectomy versus other treatment modalities for large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 6500 cases

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend simple prostatectomy or endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) as treatment of choice for bladder prostatic obstruction (BPO) caused by large prostate glands. We aimed to provide a wide-ranging analysis of the currently available evidence, comparing safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) versus open simple prostatectomy (OSP), laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP), and laser EEP.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed across MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for retrospective and prospective studies comparing RASP to OSP or LSP or laser EEP (HoLEP/ThuLEP). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) recommendations were followed to design the search strategies, selection criteria, and evidence report. A meta-analysis evaluated perioperative safety and effectiveness outcomes. The weighted mean difference and risk ratio were used to compare continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for RCT article assessing risk of bias.

RESULTS

15 studies, including 6659 patients, were selected for meta-analysis: 13 observational studies, 1 non-randomized prospective study, and 1 randomized controlled trial. RASP was associated with statistically significant longer operative time (OT) and lower postoperative complication rate, length of stay (LOS), estimated blood loss (EBL), and transfusion rate (TR) compared to OSP. LSP showed longer LOS and lower postoperative SHIM score, with no difference in OT, EBL, and complications. Compared to laser EEP, RASP presented longer LOS and catheterization time and higher TR. ThuLEP presented shorter OT than RASP. No difference were found in functional outcomes between groups both subjectively (IPSS, QoL) and objectively (Qmax, PVR).

CONCLUSION

RASP has become a size-independent treatment for the management of BPO caused by a large prostate gland. It can duplicate the functional outcomes of OSP while offering a better safety profile. When compared to LSP, the latter still stands as a valid lower-cost option, but it requires solid laparoscopic skill sets and therefore it is unlikely to spread on larger scale. When compared to laser EEP, RASP offers a shorter learning curve, but it still suffers from longer catheterization time and LOS.

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy: long-term, trifecta- and pentafecta-based analysis of functional outcomes

Background:

Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) proved to be a sound and effective procedure for bladder outlet obstructive symptoms relief. Routinely, the transvesical (Freyer) or transcapsular (Millin) techniques are performed. A novel approach of near-infrared fluorescence imaging (NIFI)-guided urethra-sparing robot-assisted prostatectomy (Madigan) was recently introduced.

Objectives:

The aim of our study was to evaluate the long-term functional outcomes between the Millin, Freyer, and Madigan RASP.

Design:

This is a single-center, retrospective evaluation of a prospectively maintained Institutional Review Board–approved database.

Methods:

Data from patients who have undergone RASP in our center were prospectively collected. Demographics, prostate size, and preoperative flowmetry parameters were assessed. Questionnaires such as International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), and International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire (ICIQ), International prostatic symptoms score (IPSS) with its quality of life (QoL) score, Male Sexual Health Questionnaire (MSHQ), Overactive bladder questionnaire (OABQ) were administered to every patient preoperatively and during follow-up. We tested composite outcomes (trifecta) defined as a combination of postoperative Q-max >15 ml/s, IPSS score < 8, and absence of complications. We also tested a pentafecta which keeps in account the persistence of antegrade ejaculation (MSHQ > 0) and the erectile function maintenance (∆IEEF < 6).

Results:

Median follow-up was 36 months. Millin, Madigan, and Freyer procedures were performed in 37 (51%), 18 (25%), and 17 (24%) cases, respectively. Trifecta was achieved in 43 (60%) patients. Preoperative ICIQ, postoperative IPSS, postoperative OABQ, and QoL were significantly different between groups (all p < 0.02). Pentafecta was achieved by 14 (20%) patients. The pentafecta group showed a statistically significant advantage in terms of postoperative IPSS and MSHQ ( p < 0.01).

Conclusion:

RASP provides an effective and durable relief of obstructive symptoms at long-term follow-up, regardless of the technique, achieving the trifecta in the majority of the patients. The Madigan technique is significantly related to the pentafecta achievement.

Laparoscopic simple prostatectomy versus robot-assisted simple prostatectomy for large benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials

Laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP) and robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) are important approaches for large benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), though it is still unclear which is superior. This study aimed to perform a pooled analysis to compare the safety and efficacy profiles of LSP and RASP. We systematically searched the databases of Science, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library database for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs, comparing LSP to RASP. The principal outcomes included perioperative, functional and complications variables. The results are presented as odds ratio (OR) or weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of dichotomous and continuous variables. Five comparative trials involving 1928 patients were included. RASP demonstrated a shorter length of hospital stay compared to LSP (WMD 1.20 days, 95% CI 0.09, 2.32; p = 0.03). However, there was no difference between the two groups regarding operative time, estimated blood loss, catheterization time and complications. Moreover, RASP had a higher maximum flow rate (Q_max) (WMD - 2.15 mL/s, 95% CI - 3.75, - 0.55; p = 0.0009) and comparable international prostate symptom score (IPSS) and sexual health inventory (SHIM) in men with LSP. The results of this study demonstrated that RASP offered comparable efficacy and safety to LSP, while maintaining a superior perioperative and functional profile. However, treatment selection should also be based on the availability and experience of the operator.