Search

Objective: Differences in outcome after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer can partly be explained by intersurgeon differences, where degree of experience is one important aspect. This study aims to define the learning curve of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) regarding oncological and functional outcomes., Materials and Methods: Out of 4003 enrolled patients in the LAPPRO trial, 3583 met the inclusion criteria, of whom 885 were operated on by an open technique. In total, 2672 patients with clinically localized prostate cancer from seven Swedish centres were operated on by RALP and followed for 8 years (LAPPRO trial). Oncological outcomes were pathology-reported surgical margins and biochemical recurrence at 8 years. Functional outcomes included patient-reported urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction at 3, 12 and 24 months. Experience was surgeon-reported experience before and during the study. The relationship between surgeon experience and functional outcomes and surgical margin status was analysed by mixed-effects logistic regression. Biochemical recurrence was analysed by Cox regression, with robust standard errors., Results: The learning curve for positive surgical margins was relatively flat, with rates of 21% for surgeons who had performed 0-74 cases and 24% for surgeons with > 300 cases. Biochemical recurrence at 4 years was 11% (0-74 cases) and 13% (> 300 cases). Incontinence was stable over the learning curve, but erectile function improved at 2 years, from 38% (0-74 cases) to 53% (> 300 cases)., Conclusions: Analysis of the learning curve for surgeons performing RALP showed that erectile function improved with increasing number of procedures, which was not the case for oncological outcomes.

Background: Radical prostatectomy reduces mortality among patients with localised prostate cancer. Evidence on whether different surgical techniques can affect mortality rates is lacking., Objective: To evaluate functional and oncological outcomes 8 yr after robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP)., Design, Setting, and Participants: We enrolled 4003 patients in a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial comparing RALP and RRP in 14 Swedish centres between 2008 and 2011. Data for functional outcomes were assessed via validated patient questionnaires administered preoperatively and at 12 and 24 mo and 8 yr after surgery., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The primary endpoint was urinary incontinence. Functional outcomes at 8 yr were analysed using the modified Poisson regression approach., Results and Limitations: Urinary incontinence was not significantly different at 8 yr after surgery between RALP and RRP (27% vs 29%; adjusted risk ratio [aRR] 1.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-1.23). Erectile dysfunction was significantly lower in the RALP group (66% vs 70%; aRR 0.93, 95% CI 0.87-0.99). Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) was significantly lower in the RALP group at 8 yr after surgery (40/2699 vs 25/885; aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34-0.93). Differences in oncological outcomes were mainly seen in the group with high D'Amico risk, with a lower risk of positive surgical margins (21% vs 34%), biochemical recurrence (51% vs 69%), and PCSM (14/220 vs 11/77) for RALP versus RRP. The main limitation is the nonrandomised design., Conclusions: In this prospective multicentre controlled trial, PCSM at 8 yr after surgery was lower for RALP in comparison to RRP. A causal relationship between surgical technique and mortality cannot be inferred, but the result confirms that RALP is oncologically safe. Taken together with better short-term results reported elsewhere, our findings confirm that implementation of RALP may continue., Patient Summary: Our study comparing two surgical techniques for removal of the prostate for localised prostate cancer shows that a robot-assisted minimally invasive technique is safe in the long term. Together with previous results showing some better short-term effects with this approach, our findings support continued use of robot-assisted surgery., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To evaluate urinary continence (UC) recovery and oncological outcomes in different risk-groups after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RALP) and open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP)., Patients and Methods: We analysed 2650 men with prostate cancer from seven open (n = 805) and seven robotic (n = 1845) Swedish centres between 2008 and 2011 in a prospective non-randomised trial, LAPPRO. UC recovery was defined as change of pads less than once in 24 h. Information was collected through validated questionnaires. Rate of positive surgical margins (PSM) and biochemical recurrence (BCR), defined as prostate-specific antigen (PSA) > 0.25 mg/ml, were recorded. We stratified patients into two risk groups (low-intermediate and high risk) based on the D'Amico risk classification system., Result: Among men with high-risk prostate cancer, we found significantly higher rates of UC recovery up to 24 months after RRP compared to RALP (66.1% vs 60.5%) RR 0.85 (CI 95% 0.73-0.99) while PSM was more frequent after RRP compared to RALP (46.8% vs 23.5%) RR 1.56 (CI 95% 1.10-2.21). In the same group no significant difference was seen in BCR. Overall, however, BCR was significantly more common after RRP compared to RALP at 24 months (9.8% vs 6.6%) RR 1.43 (Cl 95% 1.08-1.89). The limitations of this study are its non-randomized design and the relatively short time of follow-up., Conclusions: Our study indicates that men with high-risk tumour operated with open surgery had better urinary continence recovery but with a higher risk of PSM than after robotic-assisted laparoscopic surgery. No significant difference was seen in biochemical recurrence.  TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN06393679., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis is a well-known late complication after open radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) with previously reported incidences of 2.7-15%. There are few reports of the incidence after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) compared with RRP., Objective: The aim was to compare the risk of developing symptomatic stenosis after RRP and RALP, and to explore potential risk factors and the influence of stenosis on the risk of urinary incontinence., Design, Setting, and Participants: Between 2008 and 2011, 4003 men were included in a prospective trial comparing RRP and RALP at 14 Swedish centres. Clinical data and patient questionnaires were collected before, during, and after surgery., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Stenosis was identified by either patients' reports in questionnaires or case report forms. The primary endpoint is reported as unadjusted as well as adjusted relative risks (RRs), calculated with log-binomial regression models. Data on incontinence were analysed by means of a log-binomial regression model, with stenosis as an independent and incontinence as a dependent variable., Results and Limitations: Symptomatic stenosis developed in 1.9% of 3706 evaluable men within 24 mo. The risk was 2.2 times higher after RRP than after RALP (RR 2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.38-3.53). Overall, urinary incontinence was twice as common in patients who had stenosis (RR 2.01, 95% CI 1.43-2.64)., Conclusions: This large prospective study found an overall low rate of vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy, but the rate was significantly lower after robot-assisted prostatectomy. The risk of stenosis seems to be associated with the number of sutures/takes in the anastomosis, but this was statistically significant only in the RALP group., Patient Summary: We investigated the risk of developing vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after open and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. We found that the risk was generally lower than previously reported and lower after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy than after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urinary incontinence was twice as common in patients with stenosis., (Copyright © 2019 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: All types of surgery are associated with complications. The debate is ongoing whether robot-assisted radical prostatectomy can lower this risk compared to open surgery. The objective of the present study was to evaluate post-operative adverse events leading to readmissions, using clinical records to classify these adverse events systematically. Materials and methods: A prospective controlled trial of men who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic (RALP) or retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) at 14 departments of Urology (LAPPRO) between 2008 and 2011. Data on all readmissions within 3 months of surgery were collected from the Patient registry, Swedish Board of Health and Welfare. For each readmission the highest Clavien-Dindo grade was listed. Results: A total of 4003 patients were included in the LAPPRO trial and, after applying exclusion criteria, 3706 patients remained for analyses. The results showed no statistically significant difference in the overall readmission rates (8.1 vs. 7.1%) or readmission due to major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3b, 1.7 vs. 1.9%) between RALP and RRP within 90 days after surgery. Patients subjected to lymph-node dissection (LND) had twice the risk for readmission as men not undergoing LND, irrespective RALP or RRP technique. Blood transfusion was significantly more frequent during and within 30 days of RRP surgery (16 vs. 4%). Abdominal symptoms were more common after RALP. Conclusions: There is a substantial risk for hospital readmission after prostate-cancer surgery, regardless of technique; although major complications are rare. Regardless of surgical technique, attention should be focused on specific types of complications.

Background: The rapid adoption of robot-assisted laparoscopy in radical prostatectomy has preceded data regarding associated costs. Qualitative evidence regarding cost outcomes is lacking., Objective: This study assessed how costs were affected by robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) compared with open surgery., Design, Setting, and Participants: Cost analysis was based on the dataset of the LAPPRO (Laparoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open) clinical trial, which is a prospective controlled, nonrandomised trial of patients who underwent prostatectomy at 14 centres in Sweden between September 2008 and November 2011. Currently, data are available from a follow-up period of 24 mo., Intervention: In the LAPPRO trial, RALP was compared with radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP)., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Costs per surgical technique were assessed based on resource variable data from the LAPPRO database. The calculation of average costs was based on mean values; Swedish currency was converted to purchasing power parity US dollar (PPP$). All tests were two-tailed and conducted at α=0.05 significance level., Results and Limitations: The cost analysis comprised 2638 men. Based on the LAPPRO trial data, RALP was associated with an increased cost/procedure of PPP$ 3837 (95% confidence interval: 2747-4928) compared with RRP. The result was sensitive to variations in caseload. Main drivers of overall cost were robotic system cost, operation time, length of stay, and sick leave. Limitations of the study include the uneven distribution between RALP and RRP regarding procedures in public/for-profit hospitals and surgeon/centre procedural volume., Conclusions: Based on the LAPPRO trial data, this study showed that RALP was associated with an increased cost compared with RRP in Swedish health care. There are many factors influencing the costs, making the absolute result dependent on the specific setting. However, by identifying the main cost drivers and/or most influential parameters, the study provides support for informed decisions and predictions., Patient Summary: In this study, we looked at the cost outcome when performing prostatectomies by robot-assisted laparoscopic technique compared with open surgery in Sweden. We found that the robot-assisted procedure was associated with a higher mean cost., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess 90-day postoperative mortality after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) and retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) using nationwide population-based registry data., Patients and Methods: We conducted a cohort study using the National Prostate Cancer Register of Sweden, including 22 344 men with localized prostate cancer of clinical stage T1-T3, whose prostate-specific antigen levels were <50 μg/mL and who had undergone primary radical prostatectomy in the period 1998-2012. Vital status was ascertained through the Total Population Register. The rates for 90-day postoperative mortality were analysed using logistic regression analysis, and comparisons of 90-day mortality with the background population were made using standardized mortality ratios (SMRs)., Results: Of the 14 820 men who underwent RRP, 29 (0.20%) died, and of the 7 524 men who underwent RARP, 10 (0.13%) died. Mortality in the cohort during the 90-day postoperative period was lower than in an age-matched background population: SMR 0.57 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-0.75). There was no statistically significant difference in 90-day mortality according to surgical method: RARP vs RRP odds ratio (OR) 1.14; 95% CI 0.46-2.81. Postoperative 90-day mortality decreased over time: 2008-2012 vs 1998-2007 OR 0.44; 95% CI 0.21-0.95, mainly because of lower mortality after RARP., Conclusion: The 90-day postoperative mortality rates were low after RARP and RRP and there was no statistically significant difference between the methods. Given the long life expectancy among men with low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer, very low postoperative mortality is a prerequisite for RP, which was fulfilled by both RRP and RARP. The selection of healthy men for RP is highlighted by the lower 90-day mortality after RP compared with the background population., (© 2016 The Authors BJU International © 2016 BJU International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has become widely used without high-grade evidence of superiority regarding long-term clinical outcomes compared with open retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP), the gold standard., Objective: To compare patient-reported urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction 12 mo after RALP or RRP., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prospective, controlled, nonrandomised trial of patients undergoing prostatectomy in 14 centres using RALP or RRP. Clinical-record forms and validated patient questionnaires at baseline and 12 mo after surgery were collected., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analyses: Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated with logistic regression and adjusted for possible confounders. The primary end point was urinary incontinence (change of pad less than once in 24h vs one time or more per 24h) at 12 mo. Secondary end points were erectile dysfunction at 12 mo and positive surgical margins., Results and Limitations: At 12 mo after RALP, 366 men (21.3%) were incontinent, as were 144 (20.2%) after RRP. The unadjusted OR was 1.08 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87–1.34). Erectile dysfunction was observed in 1200 men (70.4%) 12 mo after RALP and 531 (74.7%) after RRP. The unadjusted OR was 0.81 (95% CI, 0.66–0.98)., Conclusions: In a Swedish setting, RALP for prostate cancer was modestly beneficial in preserving erectile function compared with RRP, without a statistically significant difference regarding urinary incontinence or surgical margins., Patient Summary: We compared patient-reported urinary incontinence after prostatectomy with two types of surgical technique. There was no statistically significant improvement in the rate of urinary leakage, but there was a small improvement regarding erectile function after robot-assisted operation., (Copyright © 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has become a widespread technique despite a lack of randomised trials showing its superiority over open radical prostatectomy., Objective: To compare in-hospital characteristics and patient-reported outcomes at 3 mo between robot-assisted laparoscopic and open retropubic radical prostatectomy., Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective, controlled trial was performed of all men who underwent radical prostatectomy at 14 participating centres. Validated patient questionnaires were collected at baseline and after 3 mo by independent health-care researchers., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: The difference in outcome between the two treatment groups were analysed using logistic regression analysis, with adjustment for identified confounders., Results and Limitations: Questionnaires were received from 2506 (95%) patients. The robot-assisted surgery group had less perioperative bleeding (185 vs 683 ml, p<0.001) and shorter hospital stay (3.3 vs 4.1 d, p<0.001) than the open surgery group. Operating time was shorter with the open technique (103 vs 175 min, p<0.001) compared with the robot-assisted technique. Reoperation during initial hospital stay was more frequent after open surgery after adjusting for tumour characteristics and lymph node dissection (1.6% vs 0.7%, odds ratio [OR] 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI 95%] 0.11-0.90). Men who underwent open surgery were more likely to seek healthcare (for one or more of 22 specified disorders identified prestudy) compared to men in the robot-assisted surgery group (p=0.03). It was more common to seek healthcare for cardiovascular reasons in the open surgery group than in the robot-assisted surgery group, after adjusting for nontumour and tumour-specific confounders, (7.9% vs 5.8%, OR 0.63, CI 95% 0.42-0.94). The readmittance rate was not statistically different between the groups. A limitation of the study is the lack of a standardised tool for the assessment of the adverse events., Conclusions: This large prospective study confirms previous findings that robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is a safe procedure with some short-term advantages compared to open surgery. Whether these advantages also include long-term morbidity and are related to acceptable costs remain to be studied., Patient Summary: We compare patient-reported outcomes between two commonly used surgical techniques. Our results show that the choice of surgical technique may influence short-term outcomes., (Copyright © 2014 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Many elderly or impotent men with prostate cancer may not receive a bundle-preserving radical prostatectomy as a result of uncertainty regarding the effect on urinary incontinence., Objective: We searched for predictors of urinary incontinence 1 yr after surgery among surgical steps during radical prostatectomy., Design, Setting, and Participants: More than 100 surgeons in 14 centers prospectively collected data on surgical steps during an open or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. At 1 yr after surgery, a neutral third-party secretariat collected patient-reported information on urinary incontinence. After excluding men with preoperative urinary incontinence or postoperative irradiation, data were available for 3379 men., Intervention: Surgical steps during radical prostatectomy, including dissection plane as a measure of the degree of preservation of the two neurovascular bundles., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analysis: Urinary incontinence 1 yr after surgery was measured as patient-reported use of pads. In different categories of surgical steps, we calculated the percentage of men changing pads "about once per 24 h" or more often. Relative risks were calculated as percentage ratios between categories., Results and Limitations: A strong association was found between the degree of bundle preservation and urinary incontinence 1 yr after surgery. We set the highest degree of bundle preservation (bilateral intrafascial dissection) as the reference category (relative risk = 1.0). For the men in the remaining six groups, ordered according to the degree of preservation, we obtained the following relative risks (95% confidence interval [CI]): 1.07 (0.63-1.83), 1.19 (0.77-1.85), 1.56 (0.99-2.45), 1.78 (1.13-2.81), 2.27 (1.45-3.53), and 2.37 (1.52-3.69). In the latter group, no preservation of any of the bundles was performed. The pattern was similar for preoperatively impotent men and for elderly men. Limitations of this analysis include the fact that noise influences the relative risks, due to variations between surgeons in the use of undocumented surgical steps of the procedure, variations in surgical experience and in how the surgical steps are reported, as well as variations in the metrics of patient-reported use of pads., Conclusions: We found that the degree of preservation of the two neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy predicts the rate of urinary incontinence 1 yr after the operation. According to our findings, preservation of both neurovascular bundles to avoid urinary incontinence is also meaningful for elderly and impotent men., Patient Summary: We studied the degree of preservation of the two neurovascular bundles during radical prostatectomy and found that the risk of incontinence decreases if the surgeon preserves two bundles instead of one, and if the surgeon preserves some part of a bundle rather than not doing so., (Copyright © 2014 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Positive surgical margins (PSMs) are a known risk factor for biochemical recurrence in patients with prostate cancer (PCa) and are potentially affected by surgical technique and volume., Objective: To investigate whether radical prostatectomy (RP) modality and volume affect PSM rates., Design, Setting, and Participants: Fourteen institutions in Europe, the United States, and Australia were invited to participate in this study, all of which retrospectively provided margins data on 9778 open RP, 4918 laparoscopic RP, and 7697 robotic RP patients operated on between January 2000 and October 2011., Outcome Measurements and Statistical Analyses: The outcome measure was PSM rate. Multivariable logistic regression analyses and propensity score methods identified odds ratios for risk of a PSM for one modality compared with another, after adjustment for age, preoperative prostate-specific antigen, postoperative Gleason score, pathologic stage, and year of surgery. Classic adjustment using standard covariates was also implemented to compare PSM rates based on center volume for each minimally invasive surgical cohort., Results and Limitations: Open RP patients had higher-risk PCa at time of surgery on average and were operated on earlier in the study time period on average, compared with minimally invasive cohorts. Crude margin rates were lowest for robotic RP (13.8%), intermediate for laparoscopic RP (16.3%), and highest for open RP (22.8%); significant differences persisted, although were ameliorated, after statistical adjustments. Lower-volume centers had increased risks of PSM compared with the highest-volume center for both laparoscopic RP and robotic RP. The study is limited by its nonrandomized nature; missing data across covariates, especially year of surgery in many of the open cohort cases; lack of standardized histologic processing and central pathology review; and lack of information regarding potential confounders such as patient comorbidity, nerve-sparing status, lymph node status, tumor volume, and individual surgeon caseload., Conclusions: This multinational, multi-institutional study of 22 393 patients after RP suggests that PSM rates might be lower after minimally invasive techniques than after open RP and that PSM rates are affected by center volume in laparoscopic and robotic cases., Patient Summary: In this study, we compared the effectiveness of different types of surgery for prostate cancer by looking at the rates of cancer cells left at the margins of what was removed in the operations. We compared open, keyhole, and robotic surgery from many centers across the globe and found that robotic and keyhole operations appeared to have lower margin rates than open surgeries. How many cases a center and surgeon do seems to affect this rate for both robotic and keyhole procedures., (Copyright © 2013 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: This study describes the study design and procedures for a prospective, non-randomized trial comparing open retropubic and robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy regarding functional and oncological outcomes., Material and Methods: The aim was to achieve a detailed prospective registration of symptoms experienced by patients using validated questionnaires in addition to documentation of surgical details, clinical examinations, medical facts and resource use. Four patient questionnaires and six case-report forms were especially designed to collect data before, during and after surgery with a follow-up time of 2 years. The primary endpoint is urinary leakage 1 year after surgery. Secondary endpoints include erectile dysfunction, oncological outcome, quality of life and cost-effectiveness at 3, 12 and 24 months after surgery., Results: The study started in September 2008 with accrual continuing to October 2011. Twelve urological departments in Sweden well established in performing radical prostatectomy are participating. Personal contact with the participating departments and patients was established to ascertain a high response rate. To reach 80% statistical power to detect a difference of 5 absolute per cent in incidence of urinary leakage, 700 men in the retropubic group and 1400 in the robotic group are needed., Conclusions: The Swedish healthcare context is well suited to performing multicentre long-term prospective clinical trials. The similar care protocols and congruent specialist training are particularly favourable. The LAPPRO trial aims to compare the two surgical techniques in aspects of short- and long-term functional and oncological outcome, cost effectiveness and quality of life, supplying new knowledge to support future decisions in treatment strategies for prostate cancer.

Objective: The last decade has witnessed an increasing trend towards minimally invasive management of prostate cancer, including laparoscopic and, more recently, robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Several different laparoscopic approaches have been continuously developed during the last 5 years and it is still unclear which technique yields the best outcome. We present our current technique of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy., Material and Methods: The technique described has evolved during the course of >400 robotic prostatectomies performed by the robotic team since the robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy program was introduced at Karolinska University Hospital in January 2002., Surgical Procedure: Our procedure comprises several modifications of previously reported ones, and we utilize fewer robotic instruments to reduce costs. An extended posterior dissection is performed to aid in the bladder neck-sparing dissection. In nerve-sparing procedures the vesicles are divided to avoid damage to the erectile nerves. In order to preserve the apical anatomy the dorsal venous complex is incised sharply and is first over-sewn after the apical dissection is completed., Conclusions: Our technique enables a more fluent dissection than previously described robotic techniques. Minimizing changes of instruments and the camera not only cuts costs but also reduces inefficient operating maneuvers, such as switching between 30 degrees and 0 degrees lenses during the procedure. We present a technique which in our hands has achieved excellent functional and oncological results.

Objective: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has shown excellent results concerning patient morbidity, with less blood loss compared to conventional surgery. Robot-assisted laparoscopy offers several additional important technical improvements and therefore it might be suggested that robotic radical prostatectomy would also offer surgical advantages. The objective of this study was to evaluate urinary continence for the first 72 cases of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy performed by a single surgical team., Material and Methods: We analysed the outcomes of the first 72 consecutive patients to undergo robot-assisted prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer at our hospital between January 2002 and May 2004. A self-administered questionnaire concerning urinary status was mailed to the patients 3 and 6 months after surgery. Pre- and peroperative characteristics were obtained from patient medical records. The mean age was 61.2 years (range 36-71 years) and the mean preoperative prostate-specific antigen level was 6.3 ng/ml (range 2.3-10.7 ng/ml). The preoperative clinical stage was T1c, 67%, T2, 28% and T3, 5% and the mean Gleason sum was 6 (range 5-9)., Results: Sixty-one of the 68 patients (90%) reported no use of pads and 6 (9%) used a maximum of 1 pad/day 3-6 months after surgery. One patient reported use of >1 pad/day 6 months after surgery. Three significant complications were noted: ureter injury, haemorrhage and femoral nerve injury., Conclusions: In this series, which represents the learning curve for one surgical team, only a tenth of the patients still required pads 3-6 months after surgery. Considering the short follow-up period, the results in this series will probably improve over time.

Background: Little is known concerning what may influence surgeon satisfaction with a surgical procedure and its associations with intraoperative factors. The objective was to explore the relationships between surgeons' self-assessed satisfaction with performed radical prostatectomies and intraoperative factors such as technical difficulties and intraoperative complications as reported by the surgeon subsequent to the operation.Methods: We utilized prospectively collected data from the controlled LAPPRO trial where 4003 patients with prostate cancer underwent open (ORP) or robot-assisted laparoscopic (RALP) radical prostatectomy. Patients were included from fourteen centers in Sweden during 2008-2011. Surgeon satisfaction was assessed by questionnaires at the end of each operation. Intraoperative factors included time for the surgical procedure as well as difficulties and complications in various steps of the operation. To model surgeon satisfaction, a mixed effect logistic regression was used. Results were presented as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).Results: The surgeons were satisfied in 2905 (81%) and dissatisfied in 702 (19%) of the surgical procedures. Surgeon satisfaction was not statistically associated with type of surgical technique (ORP vs. RALP) (OR 1.36, CI 0.76; 2.43). Intraoperative factors such as technical difficulties or complications, for example, suturing of the anastomosis was negatively associated with surgeon satisfaction (OR 0.24, CI 0.19; 0.30).Conclusions: Our data indicate that technical difficulties and/or intraoperative complications were associated with a surgeon's level of satisfaction with an operation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Studies indicate that social constraints (barriers to emotional expression) may be a risk factor for psychological morbidity. We aimed to investigate the association between prostate cancer-related social constraints and psychological well-being following prostate cancer surgery.Methods: In a group of 3478 partnered patients, participating in the Laparoscopic Prostatectomy Robot Open trial, a prospective multicenter comparative study of robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, we used log-binomial regression analysis to investigate the links between prostate cancer-related social constraints at 3 months after surgery and psychological well-being at 12 and 24 months.Results: A total of 1086 and 1093 men reported low well-being at 12 and 24 months, respectively. Prostate cancer-related social constraints by partner predicted low psychological well-being at 12 months (adjusted RR: 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9) and by others (adjusted RR: 1.9; 95% CI, 1.1-3.5). Intrusive thoughts mediated the association.Conclusions: Negative responses from the social environment, especially from partner to talking about the prostate cancer experience affected patients' psychological well-being 2 years after radical prostatectomy. Results emphasize the importance of helping patients mobilize psychosocial resources within their social network, especially among those with a lack of quality psychosocial support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]