Comparative analysis of early post-operative outcomes between retzius-sparing and anterior approach robotic radical prostatectomy for a single surgeon

IF 0.2 Q4 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY Journal of Clinical Urology Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.1177/20514158231156314
L. Tay, Robert Makin, I. Saxionis, I. Dokubo, K. Patel, S. Sivathasan, S. Smart, A. Warren, N. Shah, B. Lamb
{"title":"Comparative analysis of early post-operative outcomes between retzius-sparing and anterior approach robotic radical prostatectomy for a single surgeon","authors":"L. Tay, Robert Makin, I. Saxionis, I. Dokubo, K. Patel, S. Sivathasan, S. Smart, A. Warren, N. Shah, B. Lamb","doi":"10.1177/20514158231156314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study was to compare intraoperative and early post-operative outcomes between retzius-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) versus standard approach for RARP (S-RARP). All RARPs by a single surgeon were included and divided into two groups: (1) standard approach including combined anterior–posterior approach (S-RARP); (2) retzius-sparing posterior approach (RS-RARP). Allocation was based on prostate size and location of index lesion on MRI. Initial post-operative follow-up was at 6 weeks. Overall, 169 RARPs were performed between March 2018 and October 2021: S-RARP = 99 versus RS-RARP = 70. There was no significant difference in pre-operative body mass index (BMI), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group and clinical T stage. Intraoperative differences were found in blood loss (300 versus 200 mL, p = 0.008), console time (180 versus 135 minutes, p < 0.001) favouring RS-RARP, with no differences in nerve-spare or lymph node dissection. Post-operatively, no difference was found in ISUP grade, pathological T stage, positive surgical margins, number of lymph nodes sampled, readmissions or complications. Gland size in the RS group was smaller (38 versus 29 g, p = 0.001). Early (6 weeks) post-op follow-up showed a significant difference between groups for both pad-free continence (35% versus 53%, p = 0.011) and social continence (79% versus 89%, p = 0.024), but no difference for erectile function recovery (27% versus 50% of baseline) and post-op PSA levels < 0.1 ng/mL (85% versus 93%). Even early in the learning curve, continence recovery, operative time and blood loss were significantly better for RS-RARP than S-RARP. Margin status and PSA levels are comparable to published literature for both groups. Standardised training in RS-RARP might help to improve the uptake of this novel technique. 2.","PeriodicalId":15471,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20514158231156314","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare intraoperative and early post-operative outcomes between retzius-sparing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) versus standard approach for RARP (S-RARP). All RARPs by a single surgeon were included and divided into two groups: (1) standard approach including combined anterior–posterior approach (S-RARP); (2) retzius-sparing posterior approach (RS-RARP). Allocation was based on prostate size and location of index lesion on MRI. Initial post-operative follow-up was at 6 weeks. Overall, 169 RARPs were performed between March 2018 and October 2021: S-RARP = 99 versus RS-RARP = 70. There was no significant difference in pre-operative body mass index (BMI), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group and clinical T stage. Intraoperative differences were found in blood loss (300 versus 200 mL, p = 0.008), console time (180 versus 135 minutes, p < 0.001) favouring RS-RARP, with no differences in nerve-spare or lymph node dissection. Post-operatively, no difference was found in ISUP grade, pathological T stage, positive surgical margins, number of lymph nodes sampled, readmissions or complications. Gland size in the RS group was smaller (38 versus 29 g, p = 0.001). Early (6 weeks) post-op follow-up showed a significant difference between groups for both pad-free continence (35% versus 53%, p = 0.011) and social continence (79% versus 89%, p = 0.024), but no difference for erectile function recovery (27% versus 50% of baseline) and post-op PSA levels < 0.1 ng/mL (85% versus 93%). Even early in the learning curve, continence recovery, operative time and blood loss were significantly better for RS-RARP than S-RARP. Margin status and PSA levels are comparable to published literature for both groups. Standardised training in RS-RARP might help to improve the uptake of this novel technique. 2.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
单个外科医生保留retzius与前路机器人根治性前列腺切除术早期术后结果的比较分析
本研究的目的是比较保留retzius的机器人辅助根治性前列腺切除术(RS-RARP)与RARP的标准入路(S-RARP)的术中和术后早期结果。纳入同一位外科医生的所有rarp,并分为两组:(1)标准入路,包括前后联合入路(S-RARP);(2)保留retzius后入路(RS-RARP)。根据前列腺大小和MRI上指数病变的位置进行分配。术后随访时间为6周。总体而言,在2018年3月至2021年10月期间进行了169次rarp: S-RARP = 99对RS-RARP = 70。术前体重指数(BMI)、前列腺特异性抗原(PSA)、国际泌尿病理学会(ISUP)分级组及临床T分期差异无统计学意义。术中出血量(300 mL vs 200 mL, p = 0.008)、控制台时间(180分钟vs 135分钟,p < 0.001)均有利于RS-RARP,而神经备用或淋巴结清扫方面无差异。术后ISUP分级、病理T分期、阳性手术切缘、淋巴结取样数、再入院及并发症均无差异。RS组的腺体大小较小(38 g对29 g, p = 0.001)。术后早期(6周)随访显示两组无尿垫失禁(35%对53%,p = 0.011)和社交失禁(79%对89%,p = 0.024)有显著差异,但勃起功能恢复(27%对基线的50%)和术后PSA水平< 0.1 ng/mL(85%对93%)无差异。即使在学习曲线的早期,RS-RARP的失禁恢复、手术时间和出血量也明显优于S-RARP。两组的切缘状态和PSA水平与已发表的文献相当。RS-RARP的标准化培训可能有助于提高这种新技术的吸收。2.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Urology
Journal of Clinical Urology UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY-
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diagnostic value of the abnormal digital rectal examination in the modern MRI-based prostate cancer diagnostic pathway. Comparison of the diagnostic utility of CHOKAI, STONE and STONE PLUS scores in predicting ureteral stones larger than 5 mm Quality of life and healthcare resource use in patients with bladder pain syndrome: A survey of UK patients Analysis of the learning curve for Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for a single surgeon Effectiveness of intravesical glycosaminoglycans in the treatment of recurrent urinary tract infections: Systematic review and meta-analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1