-
International Journal of Surgery... May 2023Due to the lack of sufficient evidence, it is not clear whether robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) is better for... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Robotic-assisted versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: the first separate systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies.
BACKGROUND
Due to the lack of sufficient evidence, it is not clear whether robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) is better for prostate cancer. The authors conducted this study by separately pooling and analysing randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies to compare the perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes between RARP and LRP.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in March 2022 using Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Two independent reviewers performed literature screening, data extraction and quality assessment according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement. Subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis were performed.
RESULTS
A total of 46 articles were included, including 4 from 3 RCTs and 42 from non-randomised studies. For RCTs, meta-analysis showed that RARP and LRP were similar in blood loss, catheter indwelling time, overall complication rate, overall positive surgical margin and biochemical recurrence rates, but quantitative synthesis of non-randomised studies showed that RARP was associated with less blood loss [weighted mean difference (WMD)=-71.99, 95% CI -99.37 to -44.61, P <0.001], shorter catheterization duration (WMD=-1.03, 95% CI -1.84 to -0.22, P =0.010), shorter hospital stay (WMD=-0.41, 95% CI -0.68 to -0.13, P =0.004), lower transfusion rate (OR=0.44, 95% CI 0.35-0.56, P <0.001), lower overall complication rate (OR=0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.96, P =0.020), and lower biochemical recurrence rate (OR=0.78, 95% CI 0.66-0.92, P =0.004), compared with LRP. Both meta-analysis of RCTs and quantitative synthesis of non-randomised studies showed that RARP was associated with improved functional outcomes. From the results of the meta-analysis of RCTs, RARP was higher than LRP in terms of overall continence recovery [odds ratio (OR)=1.60, 95% CI 1.16-2.20, P =0.004), overall erectile function recovery (OR=4.07, 95% CI 2.51-6.60, P <0.001), continence recovery at 1 month (OR=2.14, 95% CI 1.25-3.66, P =0.005), 3 (OR=1.51, 95% CI 1.12-2.02, P =0.006), 6 (OR=2.66, 95% CI 1.31-5.40, P =0.007), and 12 months (OR=3.52, 95% CI 1.36-9.13, P =0.010) postoperatively, and potency recovery at 3 (OR=4.25, 95% CI 1.67-10.82, P =0.002), 6 (OR=3.52, 95% CI 1.31-9.44, P =0.010), and 12 months (OR=3.59, 95% CI 1.78-7.27, P <0.001) postoperatively, which were consistent with the quantitative synthesis of non-randomised studies. When sensitivity analysis was performed, the results remained largely unchanged, but the heterogeneity among studies was greatly reduced.
CONCLUSION
This study suggests that RARP can improve functional outcomes compared with LRP. Meanwhile, RARP has potential advantages in perioperative and oncologic outcomes.
Topics: Humans; Male; Laparoscopy; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37070788
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000193 -
Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt... Jul 2015The use of radical prostatectomy for the treatment of prostate cancer has been increasing during the last decade partially due to the widespread adoption of the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The use of radical prostatectomy for the treatment of prostate cancer has been increasing during the last decade partially due to the widespread adoption of the robotic-assisted laparoscopic technique. Although no prospective, randomized controlled trials have compared open radical prostatectomy (ORP) with robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP), numerous comparative studies have been retrospectively conducted.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was performed to clarify the role and advancement of RALRP. Studies comparing ORP with RALRP that measured outcomes of cancer control, urinary and sexual function, and complications were included. A nonsystematic review was utilized to describe the advancements in the techniques used for RALRP.
RESULTS
RALRP is the procedure of choice when treating localized prostate cancer. This preference is due to the observed improvement in morbidity rates, as evidenced by decreased rates of blood loss and postoperative pain and similar oncological outcomes when compared with ORP. Robotic assistance during surgery is continually being modified and the techniques advanced, as evidenced by improved nerve sparing for preserving potency and reconstruction of the bladder neck to help in the early recovery of urinary continence.
CONCLUSIONS
Morbidity rates should continue to improve with the advancement of minimally invasive techniques for radical prostatectomy. The adoption of robotic assistance during surgery will continue as the applications of robotic-assisted surgery expand into other solid organ malignancies.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 26351883
DOI: 10.1177/107327481502200305 -
Cureus Jun 2022Cryotherapy is one of the recognised ablative modalities for both primary and salvage therapy for prostate cancer. It presents an alternative, less invasive treatment... (Review)
Review
Cryotherapy is one of the recognised ablative modalities for both primary and salvage therapy for prostate cancer. It presents an alternative, less invasive treatment for an organ-confined disease, improved preservation of surrounding tissue and a more suitable option for patients who are unfit for radical prostatectomy. Nevertheless, the currently available literature is relatively too scarce to provide definite conclusions regarding the treatment outcomes in cryotherapy. The present study aimed to review current oncological and survival outcomes in cryotherapy for primary and recurrent prostate cancer. Furthermore, this study aimed to establish the complications and functional outcomes of cryotherapy for prostate cancer. A literature search was performed on the PubMed, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases. Current guidelines and recommendations from the European Association of Urology were also reviewed. The search keywords used included 'Cryotherapy, Prostate Cancer', 'Cryoablation, Prostate Cancer' and 'Cryosurgery, Focal Prostate Cancer'. Truncations and Boolean operators were used with the keywords. All relevant studies from after 2015, including abstracts and non-English research assessing oncological and functional outcomes and complications, were included. Twenty-six studies consisting of 11,228 patients were reviewed. Fifteen studies assessed the outcomes of primary cryotherapy, whereas 11 studies reported the outcomes in salvage therapy. The patient's age ranged 55-85 years, and the pre-procedural prostate-specific antigen (PSA) ranged 0.01-49.33 ng/mL. A total of 2031 patients were classified to be at low risk, 2,995 were at moderate risk and 253 were at high risk on the D'Amico prostate cancer risk classification system. Follow-ups ranged from 9.0 to 297.6 months. The disease-specific survival rate was 65.5%-100.0%, overall survival was 61.3%-99.1%, the PSA nadir was 0.01-2.63 ng/mL and the overall biochemical recurrence rate was 15.4%-62.0%. The complications included erectile dysfunction (3.7%-88.0%), urinary retention (2.13%-25.30%) and bladder neck stricture/stenosis (3.0%-16.7%). The functional assessment showed a mixture of improved, unchanged or worsened post-procedural outcomes in primary therapy. This systematic review did not find significant differences in the cancer-specific, overall and biochemical-free survival rate between the primary and salvage cryotherapy cohorts. The most common complications encountered in both cohorts were erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence, lower urinary tract/bladder neck stricture and infection. More prospective and double-arm studies are critically needed to provide guidance on the careful selection of patient cohorts for cryotherapy, whether for curative or salvage intent.
PubMed: 35911314
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.26400 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2022It is rare to find a large leiomyoma in the prostate, especially in that of a young man. This case report and systematic review provides additional information on the... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
It is rare to find a large leiomyoma in the prostate, especially in that of a young man. This case report and systematic review provides additional information on the diagnosis, distinguishing features of imaging examinations, and treatment options.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We report on the case of a thirty-year-old man with a large leiomyoma of the prostate. MRI of the prostate revealed a round mass in the posterior lobe, 8.0 × 8.0 × 5.5 cm in size. With the assistance of laparoscopy, we resected the prostate mass completely and spared this organ. A systematic review was conducted utilizing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) including English language published reports, from 1970 to December 2021.
RESULTS
Urinary and erectile functioning was preserved postoperatively. After a year of follow-up, no evidence of recurrence emerged. A total of 21 studies were included for analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
A medical history of no, or few, lower urinary tract symptoms; the characteristics of a benign tumor in imaging examinations; and negative tumor markers should be included in any differential diagnosis of leiomyoma of the prostrate. A prostate biopsy should be performed before the preparative radical prostatectomy and choose nonsurgical treatment to confirm the diagnosis. Nowadays, minimally invasive surgery is the preferred effective option for this disease. It is a rare recurrence after its removal by means of surgery.
PubMed: 36660196
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.878411 -
PloS One 2017This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy of the male sling and artificial urinary sphincter on treating post-prostatectomy incontinence by evaluating daily... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This meta-analysis was designed to assess the efficacy of the male sling and artificial urinary sphincter on treating post-prostatectomy incontinence by evaluating daily pad use, cure rate, frequency of improvement in incontinence, and quality of life.
METHODS
Medline, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched (until March 31, 2014) for studies that investigated the effectiveness of artificial urinary sphincter or sling surgical treatments for prostate cancer. The primary outcome was daily pad use before and after surgery and secondary outcomes were quality of life before and after surgery, and frequency of cures (no need to use of a pad for at least 1 day) and improvements (decreased pad usage) in incontinence after surgery.
RESULTS
We found that that both the sling and artificial urinary sphincter significantly decreased the number of pads used per day by about 3 (P-values <0.001) and increased the quality of life compared with before intervention (P-values < 0.001). In addition, the cure rate and was around 60%. Intervention resulted in improvement in incontinence by about 25% (P < 0.001).
CONCLUSION
Our findings indicate that both sling and artificial urinary sphincter interventions are effective in reducing incontinence and improving the patient's quality of life.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatectomy; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 28467435
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0130867 -
World Journal of Urology Jun 2022Day case or same-day discharge (SDD) pure laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP) has risen over the last few years with the aim of discharging...
PURPOSE
Day case or same-day discharge (SDD) pure laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RP) has risen over the last few years with the aim of discharging patients within 24 h, reducing costs and length of stay, and facilitating return to active life. We perform a systematic review of literature to evaluate the feasibility of SDD RP.
METHODS
A systematic review search was performed and the following bibliographic databases were accessed: PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Embase. This was carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS
Based on the literature search of 509 articles, 12 (1378 patients) met the inclusion criteria (mean age: 63 years). All studies were unicentric except one. The mean SDD surgeries experience per centre was 66 cases .The means operative time and blood loss were 154 min and 126.5 ml, respectively. Mean SDD failure was 7.4%. Concomitant lymph node dissection was performed in 56.2%. The overall complication rate was 10.2% of cases; with a majority of Clavien grade I or II. Mean readmission rate after discharge was 5%. SDD generated cost reductions compared to inpatient surgery with variable differences according to the considered healthcare system.
CONCLUSIONS
Day-case RP is a safe and feasible strategy in selected cases with multicentre proofs of concept. Its widespread use in routine practice needs further research due to biases in patient selection. Implementation of peri-operative pathways such as ERAS and prehabilitation improves patient adherence to SDD.
Topics: Feasibility Studies; Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Middle Aged; Patient Discharge; Prostate; Prostatectomy
PubMed: 35157103
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-022-03944-1 -
European Urology Open Science Oct 2022The advantages of minimally invasive surgery for radical prostatectomy (RP) have been demonstrated in a number of systematic reviews (SRs). However, the rigorous study... (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
The advantages of minimally invasive surgery for radical prostatectomy (RP) have been demonstrated in a number of systematic reviews (SRs). However, the rigorous study selection process for SR means that a lot of information can be excluded, leading to a very specific clinical scenario that is often unrepresentative of real life. Our new reverse SR methodology generates a heterogeneous population database that covers a wide range of clinical scenarios.
OBJECTIVE
To compare perioperative surgical results and complications for open retropubic RP (RRP), laparoscopic RP (LRP), and robot-assisted RP (RARP) in a reverse SR.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Eight databases were searched for SRs on RRP, LRP, or RARP between 2000 and 2020 (80 SRs). All references used in these SRs were captured for analysis (1724 articles). Perioperative outcomes and complications were compared among the RRP, LRP, and RARP approaches.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We identified 559 (32.4%) reports on RRP, 413 (23.9%) on LRP, and 752 (43.7%) on RARP, involving 1 353 485 patients overall. RARP showed a significantly higher annual volume of surgery per surgeon (AVSS) in comparison to RRP and LRP (mean 64.29, 43.26, and 41.47, respectively), a higher percentage of low-risk patients (prostate-specific antigen <10 ng/ml, Gleason <7, stage
CONCLUSIONS
Our reverse SR involved a wide real-life representative sample and reference values established in the literature and revealed that minimally invasive surgery had the best perioperative and complication results, especially RARP, which was associated with less complex cases, higher annual surgeon volume, and greater performance.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We used a wide sample representative of real-life surgical practice and reference values established in the literature for three techniques for removal of the prostate to guide patients and physicians in deciding the best surgical treatment for prostate cancer according to availability.
PubMed: 36110904
DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2022.08.015 -
World Journal of Surgical Oncology Dec 2023Extraperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches are two common modalities in single-port (SP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), but differences in safety and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Perioperative, function, and positive surgical margin in extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal single port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
Extraperitoneal and transperitoneal approaches are two common modalities in single-port (SP) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), but differences in safety and efficacy between the two remain controversial. This study aimed to compare the perioperative, function, and positive surgical margin of extraperitoneal with transperitoneal approaches SP-RARP.
METHODS
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, this study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD 42023409667). We systematically searched databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies published up to February 2023. Stata 15.1 software was used to analyze and calculate the risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD).
RESULTS
A total of five studies, including 833 participants, were included in this study. The SP-TPRP group is superior to the SP-EPRP group in intraoperative blood loss (WMD: - 43.92, 95% CI - 69.81, - 18.04; p = 0.001), the incidence of postoperative Clavien-Dindo grade II and above complications (RR: 0.55, 95% CI - 0.31, 0.99; p = 0.04), and postoperative continence recovery (RR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.05, 1.45; p = 0.04). Conversely, the hospitalization stays (WMD: 7.88, 95% confidence interval: 0.65, 15.1; p = 0.03) for the SP-EPRP group was shorter than that of the SP-TPRP group. However, there was no significant difference in operation time, postoperative pain score, total incidence of postoperative complications, and positive surgical margin (PSM) rates between the two groups (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
This study demonstrates that both extraperitoneal and extraperitoneal SP-RARP approaches are safe and effective. SP-TPRP is superior to SP-EPRP in postoperative blood loss, the incidence of postoperative Clavien-Dindo grade II and above complications, and postoperative continence recovery, but it is accompanied by longer hospital stays.
Topics: Male; Humans; Robotics; Margins of Excision; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Prostate; Prostatectomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38087327
DOI: 10.1186/s12957-023-03272-7 -
Central European Journal of Urology 2018To identify the association between the TMPRSS2:ERG fusion gene, their variants and the onset of localized prostate cancer. (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
To identify the association between the TMPRSS2:ERG fusion gene, their variants and the onset of localized prostate cancer.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
A systematic search strategy was carried out through MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, CENTRAL and unpublished literature. We included randomized control trials, cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies that involved patients >18 years-old assessing the association between TMPRSS2 fusion gene, its single nucleotide polymorphisms and prostate cancer. The primary outcome was prostate cancer defined by histology of the tumor coming from transrectal ultrasound guided biopsy, transurethral resection of the prostate or radical prostatectomy. We assessed the risk of bias with QUADAS2 and performed a meta-analysis with Stata 14.
RESULTS
We found 241 records with the search strategies. After duplicates were removed, 18 studies were included in qualitative analysis and 15 studies in meta-analysis. All included studies that had no applicability concerns and low risk of bias for flow and timing. Nine studies had an unclear risk of bias for index and reference tests, since they did not describe the blinding assessment appropriately. Regarding the association between TMPRSS2:ERG and prostate cancer, we found an odds ratio (OR) 2.24 and a 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.29 to 3.91). Regarding the kind of sample, urine showed an OR 2.79 and a 95% CI (1.12 to 6.98) and when using a DNA molecular template, the OR was 3.55 with a 95% CI (1.08 to 11.65).
CONCLUSIONS
There was an association between TMPRSS2:ERG fusion gene with the diagnosis of prostate cancer, mainly in urine samples and DNA-based molecular templates. TMPRSS2:ERG might be used as the gold standard biomarker for diagnosis and stratification of PCa.
PubMed: 30680235
DOI: 10.5173/ceju.2018.1752 -
Einstein (Sao Paulo, Brazil) 2019Urinary incontinence after prostatectomy has a significant negative impact on the quality of life of the patient. The surgical treatment includes several models of male... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Urinary incontinence after prostatectomy has a significant negative impact on the quality of life of the patient. The surgical treatment includes several models of male slings, such as adjustable slings. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of adjustable sling in the treatment of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence. This is a systematic review of literature. The following electronic databases were searched until January 2018: PubMed®, Embase, CENTRAL and LILACS. The keywords used in the search strategies were: "prostatectomy" [Mesh], "urinary incontinence" [Mesh] and "suburethral slings" [Mesh]. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies, with or without Control Group, and follow-up of more than 12 months were included. Only one randomized study with high risk of bias was included and it concluded the effectiveness equivalence between adjustable and non-adjustable slings. All other studies were cases series with patients of varying levels of incontinence intensity and history of pelvic radiation therapy and previous surgeries. The meta-analysis for 0 pad in 24 hours demonstrated an effectiveness of 53%. For the 0 to 1 pad test in 24 hours, the meta-analysis resulted in an effectiveness of 69%. Risk factors for surgery failure include prior radiation, severity of post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence, and previous surgeries. The meta-analysis of the extrusion rate was 9.8% and the most commonly reported adverse effects were pain and local infection. Evidence of low quality indicates that adjustable slings are effective for treating post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence, with frequency of adverse events similar to the surgical option considered gold standard (the artificial urinary sphincter implant).
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatectomy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reproducibility of Results; Risk Factors; Suburethral Slings; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 31553360
DOI: 10.31744/einstein_journal/2019RW4508