Search

Purpose: We report a comparative monocentric study with a short and long-term follow-up with the aim to assess differences about urinary continence outcomes in patients treated with Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP) with two different techniques: with anterior and posterior reconstruction and without any kind of reconstruction., Materials and Methods: From January 2016 to September 2021, at the Department of Urology of the "F. Miulli" Hospital of Acquaviva delle Fonti, in Italy, 850 eligible patients underwent extraperitoneal RARP with anterior and posterior reconstruction and 508 without reconstructions., Results: In patients undergoing RARP with reconstructions 1 month after surgery the urinary continence was preserved in 287/850 patients (33.8%), 3 months after surgery in 688/850 (81%), 6 months in 721/850 (84.8%), 12 months in 734/850 (86.3%), 18 months in 671/754 (89%), 24 months in 696/754 (92.3%), 36 months in 596/662 (90%), 48 months in 394/421 (93.6%), 60 months in 207/212 (97.6%). In patients undergoing RARP without reconstruction 1 month after surgery urinary continence was preserved in 99/508 (19.4%), after 3 months in 276/508 (54.3%), 6 months in 305/508 (60%), 12 months in 329/508 (64.7%), 18 months in 300/456 (65.7%), 24 months in 295/456 (64.7%), 36 months in 268/371 (72.3%), 48 months in 181/224 (81%), 60 months in 93/103 (90.3%)., Conclusion: In our case study, the RARP with anterior and posterior reconstruction technique is associated with a statistically significant higher rate (up to 48 months of follow-up) and a faster recovery of urinary continence compared to the technique without reconstructions., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a widely used treatment method for patients with clinically localized prostate cancer. Posterior reconstruction of urethrovesical anastomosis (UVA) is one of the techniques that provides early recovery of urinary continence after surgery. Changes in the technique of performing posterior reconstruction of UVA may contribute to further improvement of functional results., Aim: To evaluate the functional results of early removal of the urethral catheter (after 3 days) after RARP using a modified surgical technique of performing posterior reconstruction of UVA compared with the standard catheterization time (7 days after surgery)., Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent RARP were randomly assigned to early catheter removal (3 days after surgery, main group, n=15) and standard catheterization time (7 days after surgery, control group, n=15). RARP was performed using the Da Vinci Si system. The primary end point was the rate of spontaneous voiding after catheter removal. Secondary endpoints were the incidence of urine leakage into the paravesical tissue during retrograde cystography, as well as complications according to the Clavien-Dindo system. The frequency and severity of stress urinary incontinence after catheter removal was assessed using the International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Urinary Incontinence Short Form (ICIQ-UI SF)., Results: There were no significant differences between groups in terms of baseline and perioperative parameters. After removal of the catheter, no acute urinary retention was observed in both groups. Also, there were no cases of urine leakage into the paravesical tissue during retrograde cystography. The ICIQ-UI SF questionnaire showed no significant differences between the groups at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery., Conclusions: The method of modified posterior reconstruction allows to remove the urethral catheter 3 days after RARP. Early removal of the urethral catheter did not adversely affect the early recovery of urinary continence, the quality of UVA, and did not increase the incidence of acute urinary retention. Further studies with longer follow-up periods are needed.

Objectives: To assess the effects of posterior musculofascial reconstruction robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (PR-RALP) compared to no PR during standard RALP (S-RALP) for the treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer., Patients and Methods: We performed a systematic search with no restrictions including randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing variations of PR-RALP vs S-RALP for clinically localised prostate cancer. The quality of evidence was assessed on outcome basis according to Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Our search identified 13 records of eight unique RCTs, of which six were published studies, and two were abstract proceedings. There were 1085 randomised patients, of whom 963 completed the trials. All patients had either cT1c or cT2 or cT3a disease., Results: A PR-RALP may improve urinary continence 1 week after catheter removal compared to no PR (risk ratio [RR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-1.73; I 2  = 42%, five studies, 498 patients, low certainty of evidence [CoE]). A PR-RALP may have little to no effect on urinary continence 3 months after surgery compared to no PR (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.84-1.14; I 2  = 67%, six studies, 842 patients, low CoE). A PR-RALP probably results in little to no difference in serious adverse events compared to no PR (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.29-1.92; I 2  = 0%, six studies, 835 patients, moderate CoE)., Conclusions: This review found evidence that PR-RALP may improve early continence 1 week after catheter removal but not thereafter. Meanwhile, adverse event rates are probably not impacted and positive surgical margin rates are likely similar. There was no difference in our subgroup analysis for all outcomes with anterior reconstruction technique when combined with PR vs only PR., (© 2021 The Authors BJU International © 2021 BJU International.)

Introduction: We present our experience with a novel three-layer two-step posterior reconstruction (PR) technique using peritoneum during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) to improve recovery of postoperative urinary continence., Methods: Forty-eight patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled in this study and were divided randomly into two groups, which were treated by the standard PR technique (standard PR group; n = 24) or the three-layer PR technique using peritoneum (three-layer PR group; n = 24) during RARP. We prospectively analyzed the continence rate by the 1-hour pad test. All patients underwent urethrocystography at 6 days postoperatively to evaluate position of vesicourethral junction. Pelvic MRI was also performed at 6 months postoperatively for anatomical evaluation., Results: Four weeks after RARP, the urinary continence rate was significantly higher in the three-layer PR group (57%) than in the standard PR group (26%, p = 0.036). Urethrocystography demonstrated that the postoperative craniocaudal distance from the symphysis pubis to the level of the vesicourethral junction was significantly shorter in the three-layer PR group than in the standard PR group (p < 0.01), suggesting that there was less tension on the vesicourethral anastomosis after three-layer PR. MRI confirmed that three-layer PR provided firmer reinforcement of the structures, supporting the posterior aspect of the urethral sphincter complex., Conclusions: This prospective comparative study might suggest that three-layer two-step PR using peritoneum during RARP is a simple and feasible method seeming to improve early recovery of postoperative continence compared with standard two-step PR, although larger multicenter randomized controlled trials will be needed.

Background: The introduction of robotics revolutionized prostate cancer surgery because the magnified three-dimensional vision system and wristed instruments allow microsurgery to be performed. The advantages of robotic surgery could lead to improved continence outcomes in terms of early recovery compared with the traditional surgical methods., Objective: To describe the total anatomical reconstruction (TAR) technique during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP)., Primary Endpoint: evaluation of the continence rate at different time points. Secondary endpoint: evaluation of urine leakage and anastomosis stenosis rates related to the technique., Design, Setting, and Participants: June, 2013 to November, 2014; prospective consecutive series of patients with localized prostate cancer (cT1-3, cN0, cM0)., Surgical Procedure: RARP with TAR was performed in all cases. Lymph node dissection was performed if the risk of lymph nodal metastasis was over 5%, according to the Briganti updated nomogram., Measurements: Preoperative, intraoperative, postoperative, and pathological variables were analyzed. Enrolled patients were arbitrarily divided into three groups according to a time criterion. The relationships between the learning curve and the trend of the above-mentioned variables were analyzed using LOESS analysis. Continence was rigorously analyzed preoperatively and at 24h, 1 wk, 4 wk, 12 wk, and 24 wk after catheter removal., Results and Limitations: In total, 252 patients were analyzed. The continence rates immediately after catheter removal and at 1 wk, 4 wk, 12 wk, and 24 wk after RARP were 71.8%, 77.8%, 89.3%, 94.4%, and 98.0%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that the nerve sparing technique, D'Amico risk groups, lymph node dissection, and prostate volume were involved in the early recovery of urinary continence. One ileal perforation requiring reoperation was recorded. The transfusion rate was 0.8%. Thirty-one (12.3%) postoperative complications were recorded up to 6 mo after surgery. Among these, eight acute urinary retentions (3.2%) and three urine leakages (1.2%) were recorded. There was a lack of randomization and comparison with other techniques. Both anatomical dissection of the prostatic apex and TAR were used. The results may not be generalized to low-volume centers., Conclusions: The TAR technique showed promising results in the early recovery of urinary continence, as well as watertight anastomosis and a low rate of urine leakage. The oncologic results were not affected. Comparative studies are needed to support the quality of reported results., Patient Summary: On the basis of our findings, it seems that the risk of urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy can be lowered via meticulous anatomical reconstruction using a robotic system. Comparative studies are required to support the reported results., (Copyright © 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To develop a modified technique of "total pelvic floor reconstruction" during non-nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, and to determine its effect on postoperative urinary outcomes., Methods: A total of 128 patients who underwent non-nerve-sparing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were evaluated, including 81 with total pelvic floor reconstruction and 47 with non-total pelvic floor reconstruction. Nerve-sparing cases were excluded. Urinary outcomes were assessed with self-administrated questionnaires (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite) at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The total pelvic floor reconstruction technique included two concepts involving posterior and anterior reconstructions. In posterior reconstruction, Denonvilliers' fascia was approximated to the bladder neck and the median dorsal raphe by slipknot. The anterior surface of the bladder-neck was approximated to the anterior detrusor apron and the puboprostatic ligament collar for anterior reconstruction., Results: There were no significant differences between the two groups in the patients' characteristics, and in perioperative and oncological outcomes. In the total pelvic floor reconstruction group, the continence rates at 3, 6 and 12 months after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were 45.7%, 71.4%, and 84.6%, respectively. In the non-total pelvic floor reconstruction group, the continence rates were 26.1%, 46.8% and 60.9%, respectively. The total pelvic floor reconstruction technique resulted in significantly higher continence rates at 3, 6 and 12 months after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy, respectively (all P < 0.05). The mean interval to achieve continence was significantly shorter in the total pelvic floor reconstruction group (mean 7.7 months) than in the non-total pelvic floor reconstruction group (mean 9.8 months; P = 0.0003)., Conclusion: The total pelvic floor reconstruction technique allows preservation of the blood supply to the urethra and physical reinforcement of the pelvic floor. Therefore, this technique is likely to improve urinary continence outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy., (© 2014 The Japanese Urological Association.)

A posterior reconstruction (PR) might improve the fluidity and delicacy of the maneuvers related to the neovesico-urethral anastomosis during robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). Our objective is to describe in detail the surgical steps of PR and to assess its feasibility and functional outcomes. The data regarding patients undergoing a totally intracorporeal RARC with neobladder and PR for high-grade and/or muscle-invasive urothelial cancer of the bladder at Karolinska University Hospital between October 2015 and November 2016 by a single surgeon (PW) were reviewed. Prior to the anastomosis, a modified posterior Rocco's repair involving the Denonvillier's fascia, the rhabdosphincter, and the posterior side of the ileal neobladder neck was performed. The steps are shown in a video at https://doi.org/10.1089/vid.2019.0029. The primary outcome was urinary continence; the secondary outcomes were urinary leakage, intermittent catheterization, and complications related to the reconstructive steps. Eleven male patients with a median age and BMI of 67 years and 24, respectively, underwent RARC with PR associated to the neovesico-urethral anastomosis. Overall and posterior reconstruction time were 300′ (195–320) and 6′ (4–7), respectively. The daytime and nighttime continence rates were 100% and 44% at 12 months, respectively; the median pad weight was 3.5 g and 108 g at daytime and nighttime, respectively. One urinary leakage from the urethrovesical anastomosis was treated conservatively. Two patients perform intermittent catheterization. The posterior reconstruction during RARC is safe and feasible, providing good continence rates. It supported a careful suturing of the anastomosis as well as an uncomplicated catheter placement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Context: In 2001, Rocco et al. described a surgical technique whose aim was the reconstruction of the posterior musculofascial plate after radical prostatectomy (RP) to improve early return to urinary continence. Since then, many surgeons have applied this technique—either as it was described or with some modification—to open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted RP. Objective: To review the outcomes reported in comparative studies analysing the influence of reconstruction of the posterior aspect of the rhabdosphincter after RP. The main outcome evaluated was urinary continence at 3–7 d, 30–45 d, 90 d, 180 d, and 1 yr after catheter removal. Evidence acquisition: A systematic review of the literature was performed in November 2011, searching the Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. A “free-text” protocol using the terms posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter, posterior rhabdosphincter, and early continence was applied. Studies published only as abstracts and reports from meetings were not included in this review. One thousand seven records were retrieved from the Medline database, 1541 from the Embase database, 1357 from the Scopus database, and 1041 from the Web of Science database. The authors reviewed the records to identify studies comparing cohorts of patients who underwent RP with or without restoration of the posterior aspect of the rhabdosphincter. Only papers evaluating use of this technique as the only technical modification among the groups were included. A cumulative analysis was conducted using Review Manager v.5.1 software (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK). Evidence synthesis: Eleven studies were identified in the literature search, including two randomised controlled trials (RCTs), which were negative studies. The cumulative analysis of comparative studies showed that reconstruction of the posterior musculofascial plate improves early return of continence within the first 30 d after RP (p =0.004), while continence rates 90 d after surgery are not affected by use of the reconstruction technique. The statistical significance of the reconstruction seems to decrease when higher continence rates are reported. Use of posterior rhabdosphincter reconstruction does not seem to be related to positive surgical margin (PSM) rates or with complications like acute urinary retention (AUR) and bladder neck stricture (BNS). Some studies suggested lower anastomotic leakage rates with the posterior musculofascial plate reconstruction technique. Conclusions: The role of reconstruction of the posterior musculofascial plate in terms of earlier continence recovery is encouraging but still controversial. Methodological flaws and poor surgical standardisation seem to be the major causes. In two RCTs and one parallel (not randomised) group trial, posterior rhabdosphincter reconstruction offered no significant advantage for return of early continence after RP. No significant complications related to the posterior musculofascial plate reconstruction technique have been reported so far. A multicentre RCT is necessary to clarify the possible role of the technique in terms of earlier continence recovery. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]