Robotic revision of vesicourethral stricture after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Princiotta A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC10357831 | biostudies-literature | 2023
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundTo compare the postoperative continence and clinical outcomes of Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RS-RALP) with non-RS RALP for patients with prostate cancer.MethodsWe searched PUBMED, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register from 1999 to 2019 for studies comparing RS-RALP to non-RS RALP for the treatment of prostate cancer. We used RevMan 5.2 to pool the data.ResultsA total of seven studies involving 1620 patients were included in our meta-analysis. No significant difference was found in positive surgical margins (PSM), bilateral nerve-sparing, postoperative hernia, complications, blood loss, or operative time. Postoperative continence was better with RS-RALP compared with non-RS RALP (OR = 1.02, OR: 2.86, 95% CI 1.94-4.20, p < 0.05).ConclusionsRS-RALP had a better recovery of postoperative continence than non-RS RALP. The perioperative outcomes were comparable for the two methods.
| S-EPMC7398331 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11228669 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7807303 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Our aim is to describe Gallucci's (VV-G) technique for vesicourethral anastomosis and posterior musculofascial reconstruction (PMFR) during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and to assess early urinary continence recovery and perioperative outcomes. VV-G consists of a "single knot-single running suture" vesicourethral anastomosis with PMFR. Methods: Between September 2019 and October 2021, we prospectively compared VV-G vs. conventional Van Velthoven anastomosis (VV-STD) during RARP. We excluded patients with urinary incontinence, pelvic radiotherapy, and urethral and BPH surgery prior to RARP. Social continence (SC) recovery, perioperative complications, and length of hospital stay (LOS) were compared between VV-G vs. VV-STD. SC was defined as 0-1 pad/die. We applied 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) adjusting for different covariates (age, Charlson Comorbidity Index, BMI, prostate volume, nerve-sparing and lymph node dissection). Results: From 166 patients, 1:1 PSM resulted in two equally sized groups of 40 patients each with no residual differences (all p ≥ 0.2). VV-G yielded higher 3-month SC rates than VV-STD (97.5 vs. 55.0%, p < 0.001). A tiny difference was still recorded at one-year follow-up (97.5 vs. 80.0%, p = 0.029, HR: 2.90, 95% CI: 1.74-4.85, p < 0.001). Conversely, we observed no differences in any perioperative complications (15.0 vs. 22.5%, OR: 0.61, 95% CI 0.19-1.88, p = 0.4) and LOS (3 vs. 4 days, Δ: -0.69 ± 0.61, p = 0.1). Conclusions: VV-G significantly improved early SC recovery without increasing perioperative morbidity. In our opinion, VV-G represents an easy-to-learn and easy-to-teach technique due to its single-suture, single-knot, and symmetrical design.
| S-EPMC10381871 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundProstate cancer (PCa) represents the most common solid organ malignancy in men. Fortunately, at the time of diagnosis, the majority of cases are staged as localized or regional disease, conferring excellent 5- and 10-year cure rates. There are several first line treatment options including surgical approaches such as robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and radiation therapy (RT) available to patients with localized disease that offer similar PCa oncologic outcomes but are associated with potentially significant side effects which may impact health-related quality of life (HRQOL) domains. Recently, clinicians and investigators have sought to better understand these changes in HRQOL metrics with the utilization of patient-reported outcomes (PRO). Given that RARP represents the most common surgical treatment for PCa in the United States, there has been a particular interest in assessing these outcomes derived by patient perspectives to more fully appreciate treatment-related impact on quality of life following RARP.ObjectiveThis narrative review sought to explore the instruments available to measure quality of life after RARP, a review of the PRO data after RARP, and future directions for assessing and improving quality of life outcomes following this surgery.Clinical useThere are several treatment options for men diagnosed with local and regional prostate cancer with similar oncologic outcomes but differing patterns of side effects affecting post-treatment quality of life. Understanding data reported directly by patients following RARP about their side effects and quality of life gives providers additional information for appropriate preoperative counseling for patients choosing between treatment options for their prostate cancer.
| S-EPMC8236265 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Radical prostatectomy remains an important means to treat prostate cancer. A major limiting factor to radical prostatectomy is short- and long-term complications, especially incontinence and sexual dysfunction. With the advent of robotic radical prostatectomy, the ability to easily evaluate technical issues with video has been realized. In this article, we present a step-by-step examination of our procedure and our results over the past 5 years.
| S-EPMC6071518 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Over the past two decades, robotic surgery has seen substantial advances, with significant growth in novel platforms, particularly since 2019. As a high-volume center experienced with various robotic systems, we share our initial impressions of the new da Vinci 5 platform for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Key improvements include enhanced console ergonomics, more precise operative imaging, and the integration of smart commands for streamlined surgical control. Notably, force feedback instruments offer the potential for reduced tissue trauma, although further studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and cost effectiveness. Our early experiences suggest that surgeons familiar with previous da Vinci models, particularly the Xi platform, will find the transition to the da Vinci 5 seamless, with minimal learning curve adjustments. Using propensity score matching, we compared perioperative outcomes for 50 da Vinci 5 RARP procedures (performed after the learning curve) with 150 da Vinci Xi cases. In our experience, optimal performance and perioperative outcomes were obtained with both models. Further studies are needed to identify any clinically significant advantages of one platform over the other.Patient summaryWe compared outcomes for patients undergoing removal of the prostate using two different surgical robots (da Vinci Xi and da Vinci 5). Optimal operative outcomes were obtained with both robots, but further studies are needed to evaluate whether one robot is clinically superior to the other.
| S-EPMC11417192 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the pathological and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) performed by one surgeon at a single center.SubjectsWe evaluated 700 patients with localized prostate cancer (i.e., 250 received LRP and 450 received RARP) in the study. The clinicopathological outcomes, positive surgical margin (PSM) frequency, and biochemical recurrence (BCR)-free survival were compared between LRP and RARP.ResultsAt diagnosis, the median patient age and level of prostate-specific antigsen in the serum for LRP were 68 years and 8.1 ng/ml, respectively, while those for RARP were 66 years and 7.7 ng/ml, respectively. In the LRP group, the overall PSM rate was 31.2% (11.1% for pT2a, 19.0% for pT2b, 25.0% for pT2c, 60.0% for pT3a, 64.3% for pT3b, and 50% for pT4). In the RARP group, the overall PSM rate was 20.7% (4.8% for pT2a, 15.9% for pT2b, 12.9% for pT2c, 36.9% for pT3a, 46.2% for pT3b, and 100% for pT4). The PSM rate was significantly lower for RARP in men with pT2c, pT3a, or pT3b disease (p = 0.006, p = 0.009, and p = 0.027, respectively). Based on the multivariate analysis, RARP reduced the risk of BCR (hazard ratio = 0.8, p = 0.014).ConclusionsWe compared the pathological findings and rates of BCR-free survival between patients who received LRP and those who received RARP at a single center. The rate of BCR-free survival was significantly higher in men classified as D'Amico high-risk patients who received RARP versus that reported in D'Amico high-risk patients who received LRP.
| S-EPMC7125366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We present a 61-year-old man who was diagnosed with synchronous prostate cancer and suspicious renal cell carcinoma of the right kidney, treated with combined Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) and robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN). The combined approach using RS-RARP and RAPN is technically feasible and safe surgical option for treatment of concomitant prostate cancer and suspicious renal cell carcinoma.
| S-EPMC4791664 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIt is not clear whether the routine placement of a pelvic drain after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy is a necessity. The aim of this study was to investigate this through a meta-analysis of RCTs and non-randomized studies.MethodsA search was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the Web of Science, up to 9 March 2023, for clinical trials comparing no drain with pelvic drain placement for patients with prostate cancer after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Two researchers independently conducted literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment. A random-effect model was assumed for all analyses. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate the methodological quality of RCTs and, for non-randomized studies, the ROBINS-I tool was used (where ROBINS-I stands for Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions). This meta-analysis was prospectively registered in PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42023406429).ResultsA total of six studies with 1480 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Both the meta-analysis of RCTs and the meta-analysis of non-randomized studies showed that patients without drains had a similar estimated blood loss (mean difference 40.49 ml, 95% c.i. -59.75 to 140.74 ml, P = 0.430, and mean difference -14.20 ml, 95% c.i. -32.26 to 3.87 ml, P = 0.120 respectively), overall complication rate (OR 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.35 to 1.04, P = 0.070, and OR 0.90, 95% c.i. 0.59 to 1.39, P = 0.640 respectively), Clavien-Dindo grade I-II complication rate (OR 0.62, 95% c.i. 0.34 to 1.13, P = 0.120, and OR 0.83, 95% c.i. 0.28 to 2.51, P = 0.750 respectively), Clavien-Dindo grade III-V complication rate (OR 0.60, 95% c.i. 0.10 to 3.69, P = 0.590, and OR 0.92, 95% c.i. 0.25 to 3.39, P = 0.900 respectively), and duration of hospital stay (mean difference -0.08 days, 95% c.i. -0.45 to 0.29 days, P = 0.670, and mean difference -0.64 days, 95% c.i. -2.67 to 1.39 days, P = 0.540 respectively) compared with routinely drained patients. Meta-analysis of non-randomized studies revealed that the duration of operation for patients without drains was shorter than that for patients with drains (mean difference -34.88 min, 95% c.i. -43.58 to -26.18 min, P < 0.001), but the meta-analysis of RCTs indicated that there was no significant difference between the two groups (mean difference -7.64 min, 95% c.i. -15.61 to 0.32 min, P = 0.060).ConclusionThe intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of patients without drains were not inferior to those of patients with drains. In selected patients, pelvic drains can be omitted after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
| S-EPMC10754771 | biostudies-literature