-
Cancers Nov 2023The aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence regarding the oncological and functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) for... (Review)
Review
The aim of this study was to systematically review the current evidence regarding the oncological and functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy (sRP) for recurrent prostate cancer. A systematic review was conducted throughout September 2022 using the PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Embase databases. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to identify eligible studies. A total of 55 studies (3836 patients) met our eligibility criteria. The vast majority of men included had radiation therapy (including brachytherapy) as their first-line treatment ( = 3240, 84%). Other first-line treatments included HIFU ( = 338, 9%), electroporation ( = 59, 2%), proton beam therapy ( = 54, 1.5%), cryotherapy ( = 34, 1%), focal vascular targeted photodynamic therapy ( = 22, 0.6%), and transurethral ultrasound ablation ( = 19, 0.5%). Median preoperative PSA, at the time of recurrence, ranged from 1.5 to 14.4 ng/mL. The surgical approach was open in 2300 (60%) cases, robotic in 1465 (38%) cases, and laparoscopic in 71 (2%) cases. Since 2019, there has been a clear increase in robotic versus conventional surgery (1245 versus 525 cases, respectively). The median operative time and blood loss ranged from 80 to 297 min and 75 to 914 mL, respectively. Concomitant lymph node dissection was performed in 2587 cases (79%). The overall complication rate was 34%, with a majority of Clavien grade I or II complications. Clavien ≥ 3 complications ranged from 0 to 64%. Positive surgical margins were noted in 792 cases (32%). The median follow-up ranged from 4.6 to 94 months. Biochemical recurrence after sRP ranged from 8% to 51.5% at 12 months, from 0% to 66% at 22 months, and from 48% to 59% at 60 months. The specific and overall survival rates ranged from 13.4 to 98% and 62 to 100% at 5 years, respectively. Urinary continence was maintained in 52.1% of cases. sRP demonstrated acceptable oncological outcomes. These results, after sRP, are influenced by several factors, and above all by pre-treatment assessment, including imaging, with the development of mpMRI and metabolic imaging. Our results demonstrated that SRP can be considered a suitable treatment option for selected patients, but the level of evidence remains low.
PubMed: 38001745
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15225485 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Dec 2023This study aims to conduct a systematic review of full economic analyses of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in adults' thoracic and abdominopelvic indications. Authors... (Review)
Review
This study aims to conduct a systematic review of full economic analyses of robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) in adults' thoracic and abdominopelvic indications. Authors used Medline, EMBASE, and PubMed to conduct a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines. Fully published economic articles in English were included. Methodology and reporting quality were assessed using standardized tools. Majority of studies (28/33) were on oncology procedures. Radical prostatectomy was the most reported procedure (16/33). Twenty-eight studies used quality-adjusted life years, and five used complication rates as outcomes. Nine used primary and 24 studies used secondary data. All studies used modeling. In 81% of studies (27/33), RAS was cost-effective or potentially cost-effective compared to comparator procedures, including radical prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy. Societal perspective, longer-term time-horizon, and larger volumes favored RAS. Cost-drivers were length of stay and equipment cost. From societal and payer perspectives, robotic-assisted surgery is a cost-effective strategy for thoracic and abdominopelvic procedures.Clinical trial registration This study is a systematic review with no intervention, not a clinical trial.
Topics: Male; Humans; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Prostate; Prostatectomy; Quality-Adjusted Life Years
PubMed: 37843673
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01731-7 -
European Urology Oncology Dec 2023The optimum use of brachytherapy (BT) combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localised/locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) remains uncertain. (Review)
Review
CONTEXT
The optimum use of brachytherapy (BT) combined with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) for localised/locally advanced prostate cancer (PCa) remains uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To perform a systematic review to determine the benefits and harms of EBRT-BT.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and EBM Reviews-Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were systematically searched for studies published between January 1, 2000 and June 7, 2022, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Eligible studies compared low- or high-dose-rate EBRT-BT against EBRT ± androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and/or radical prostatectomy (RP) ± postoperative radiotherapy (RP ± EBRT). The main outcomes were biochemical progression-free survival (bPFS), severe late genitourinary (GU)/gastrointestinal toxicity, metastasis-free survival (MFS), cancer-specific survival (CSS), and overall survival (OS), at/beyond 5 yr. Risk of bias was assessed and confounding assessment was performed. A meta-analysis was performed for randomised controlled trials (RCTs).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Seventy-three studies were included (two RCTs, seven prospective studies, and 64 retrospective studies). Most studies included participants with intermediate-or high-risk PCa. Most studies, including both RCTs, used ADT with EBRT-BT. Generally, EBRT-BT was associated with improved bPFS compared with EBRT, but similar MFS, CSS, and OS. A meta-analysis of the two RCTs showed superior bPFS with EBRT-BT (estimated fixed-effect hazard ratio [HR] 0.54 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.40-0.72], p < 0.001), with absolute improvements in bPFS at 5-6 yr of 4.9-16%. However, no difference was seen for MFS (HR 0.84 [95% CI 0.53-1.28], p = 0.4) or OS (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.63-1.19], p = 0.4). Fewer studies examined RP ± EBRT. There is an increased risk of severe late GU toxicity, especially with low-dose-rate EBRT-BT, with some evidence of increased prevalence of severe GU toxicity at 5-6 yr of 6.4-7% across the two RCTs.
CONCLUSIONS
EBRT-BT can be considered for unfavourable intermediate/high-risk localised/locally advanced PCa in patients with good urinary function, although the strength of this recommendation based on the European Association of Urology guideline methodology is weak given that it is based on improvements in biochemical control.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We found good evidence that radiotherapy combined with brachytherapy keeps prostate cancer controlled for longer, but it could lead to worse urinary side effects than radiotherapy without brachytherapy, and its impact on cancer spread and patient survival is less clear.
PubMed: 38151440
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2023.11.018 -
Urology Research & Practice Jan 2024Prostate cancer is the second- leading cause of cancer death among men. We aimed to evaluate high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), open radical prostatectomy (ORP),...
OBJECTIVE
Prostate cancer is the second- leading cause of cancer death among men. We aimed to evaluate high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU), open radical prostatectomy (ORP), robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), and external beam radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of localized low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer.
METHODS
We searched bibliographic databases for case-control, cohort, and randomized controlled studies. We used MeSH subject headings and free text terms for prostate cancer, HIFU, ORP, RARP, RT, failure-free survival (FFS), biochemical disease-free survival (BDFS), urinary incontinence (UI), and erectile dysfunction (ED).
RESULTS
Fourteen studies were included in the review, for a total of 34 927 participants. Among the 8 studies of HIFU as the primary treatment of localized low- and intermediate- risk prostate cancer, 4 studies reported 5-year FFS rates ranging from 67.8% to 97.8%, 3 studies reported 5-year BDFS ranging from 58% to 85.4%, 5 studies reported 1-year UI rates ranging from 0% to 6%, and 4 studies reported 1-year ED rates ranging from 11.4% to 38.7%. Furthermore, our search revealed a 5-year FFS benefit favoring ORP compared to RT, a 1-year UI rate favoring ORP compared to RARP, and a 1-year ED rate favoring ORP compared to RARP.
CONCLUSION
Our systematic review and meta-analysis revealed lack of studies with active comparators comparing HIFU to standard of care (ORP, RARP, or RT) in primary treatment of localized low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Open radical prostatectomy has favorable efficacy outcomes compared to RT, while RARP has beneficial functional outcomes compared to ORP, respectively.
PubMed: 38451125
DOI: 10.5152/tud.2024.23123 -
Therapeutic Advances in Urology 2023The leakage of urine during sexual arousal, known as climacturia, is an under-recognized clinical condition often overshadowed by erectile dysfunction in men who have... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The leakage of urine during sexual arousal, known as climacturia, is an under-recognized clinical condition often overshadowed by erectile dysfunction in men who have undergone radical prostatectomy.
OBJECTIVES
This study aims to determine and evaluate the role of the Mini-Jupette technique and its alternatives in the treatment of climacturia.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
We conducted a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for systematic reviews. We searched Medline PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases until October 2022.
RESULTS
We included seven studies involving 120 patients with climacturia. Different types of grafts were used, ranging from synthetic mesh to autologous grafts. In all seven studies, the use of the Adrianne Mini-Jupette (AMJ) and its alternatives showed a high percentage of improvement in climacturia, with reported complete resolution ranging from 65% to 93%. Regarding postoperative complications, one study reported the highest sling explantation rate at 11% (4/38), while other studies reported complications ranging from subjective symptoms such as dysuria and perineal pain to the need for subsequent artificial urinary sphincter placement.
CONCLUSION
The AMJ sling and its variations are low-cost, time-efficient, and relatively safe procedures with high patient satisfaction rates among those treated for climacturia.
PubMed: 38090352
DOI: 10.1177/17562872231215180 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise on urinary incontinence after radical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise on urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy.
METHODS
We searched the literature for randomized controlled trials evaluating the diagnostic analysis of preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise (PFME) and postprostatectomy incontinence in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PsycINFO, China Biomedical Literature Database, China Journal Full-text Database, Wanfang Database and Weipu Database. The retrieval time limit is from the establishment of the database to January 2023. We used a risk ratio with accompanying 95% confidence interval (CI) to express estimates. Reviewer Manager (RevMan) 5.1.0 was used to complete all statistical analyses.
RESULTS
Twelve studies were included based on the selection criteria. The total number of patients included in the final analysis was 1,365. At 1th month, there was no difference in continence rates between the groups [odds ratio (OR): 0.47; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.22-1.02, = 0.06]. At 3th month, there was statistically significant difference in PFME group before operation (OR: 0.61; 95% CI, 0.37-0.98, = 0.04). At 6th and 12th months, there was no difference between groups (OR: 0.57; 95% CI, 0.28-1.17, = 0.13), (OR: 0.56; 95% CI, 0.27-1.15, = 0.12).
CONCLUSION
Preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise can improve postoperative urinary incontinence at 3rd months after radical prostatectomy, but it cannot improve urinary incontinence at 6th months or longer after surgery, which indicates that preoperative PFME can improve early continence rate, but cannot improve long-term urinary incontinence continence rate.
Topics: Male; Humans; Pelvic Floor; Prostatectomy; China; Databases, Factual; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 37588123
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1186067 -
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 -
Frontiers in Endocrinology 2023Surgical treatment is important for male lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) management, but there are few reviews of the risks of reoperation. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Surgical treatment is important for male lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) management, but there are few reviews of the risks of reoperation.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding the reoperation rates of surgical treatment for LUTS in accordance with current recommendations and guidelines.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
Eligible studies published up to July 2023, were searched for in the PubMed (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Embase (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and Web of Science™ (Clarivate™, Philadelphia, PA, USA) databases. STATA (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA) software was used to conduct the meta-analysis. Random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled incidences (PIs) of reoperation and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
A total of 119 studies with 130,106 patients were included. The reoperation rate of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 4.0%, 5.0%, 6.0%, and 7.7%, respectively. The reoperation rate of plasma kinetic loop resection of the prostate (PKRP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 3.5%, 3.6%, 5.7%, and 6.6%, respectively. The reoperation rate of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 2.4%, 3.3%, 5.4%, and 6.6%, respectively. The reoperation rate of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 3.3%, 4.1%, 6.7%, and 7.1%, respectively. The reoperation rate of surgery with AquaBeam at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 2.6%, 3.1%, 3.0%, and 4.1%, respectively. The reoperation rate of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 12.2%, 20.0%, 26.4%, and 23.8%, respectively. The reoperation rate of transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 9.9%, 19.9%, 23.3%, and 31.2%, respectively. The reoperation rate of transurethral incision of the prostate (TUIP) at 5 years was 13.4%. The reoperation rate of open prostatectomy (OP) at 1 and 5 years was 1.3% and 4.4%, respectively. The reoperation rate of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) at 1, 2, and 5 years was 3.7%, 7.7%, and 8.4%, respectively.
CONCLUSION
Our results summarized the reoperation rates of 10 surgical procedures over follow-up durations of 1, 2, 3, and 5 years, which could provide reference for urologists and LUTS patients.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023445780.
Topics: United States; Humans; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Transurethral Resection of Prostate; Prostate; Reoperation; Embolization, Therapeutic; Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms
PubMed: 38027158
DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1287212 -
International Journal of Surgery... Jul 2023Urology has been at the forefront of adopting laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques to improve patient outcomes. This systematic review aimed to examine the...
BACKGROUND
Urology has been at the forefront of adopting laparoscopic and robot-assisted techniques to improve patient outcomes. This systematic review aimed to examine the literature relating to the learning curves of major urological robotic and laparoscopic procedures.
METHODS
In accordance with PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic literature search strategy was employed across PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 2021, alongside a search of the grey literature. Two independent reviewers completed the article screening and data extraction stages using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale as a quality assessment tool. The review was reported in accordance with AMSTAR (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) guidelines.
RESULTS
Of 3702 records identified, 97 eligible studies were included for narrative synthesis. Learning curves are mapped using an array of measurements including operative time (OT), estimated blood loss, complication rates as well as procedure-specific outcomes, with OT being the most commonly used metric by eligible studies. The learning curve for OT was identified as 10-250 cases for robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy and 40-250 for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. The robot-assisted partial nephrectomy learning curve for warm ischaemia time is 4-150 cases. No high-quality studies evaluating the learning curve for laparoscopic radical cystectomy and for robotic and laparoscopic retroperitoneal lymph node dissection were identified.
CONCLUSION
There was considerable variation in the definitions of outcome measures and performance thresholds, with poor reporting of potential confounders. Future studies should use multiple surgeons and large sample sizes of cases to identify the currently undefined learning curves for robotic and laparoscopic urological procedures.
Topics: Male; Humans; Robotics; Urology; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Learning Curve; Laparoscopy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37132184
DOI: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000000345 -
Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) Dec 2023It remains unclear whether antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) should be recommended or discouraged in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) for prostate... (Review)
Review
It remains unclear whether antibiotic prophylaxis (AP) should be recommended or discouraged in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) for prostate cancer (PCa). The development of microbial resistance and side effects are risks of antibiotic use. This systematic review (SR) investigates the evidence base for AP in RALP. A systematic literature search was conducted until 12 January 2023, using Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Cochrane CDSR (via Ovid) and CINAHL for studies reporting the effect of AP on postoperative infectious complications in RALP. Of 436 screened publications, 8 studies comprising 6378 RALP procedures met the inclusion criteria. There was no evidence of a difference in the rate and severity of infective complications within 30 days after RALP surgery between different AP protocols. No studies omitted AP. For patients who received AP, the overall occurrence of postoperative infectious complications varied between 0.6% and 6.6%. The reported urinary tract infection (UTI) rates varied from 0.16% (4/2500) to 8.9% (15/169). Wound infections were reported in 0.46% (4/865) to 1.12% (1/89). Sepsis/bacteraemia and hyperpyrexia were registered in 0.1% (1/1084) and 1.6% (5/317), respectively. Infected lymphoceles (iLC) rates were 0.9% (3 of 317) in a RALP cohort that included 88.6% pelvic lymph node dissections (PLND), and 3% (26 of 865) in a RALP cohort where all patients underwent PLND. Our findings underscore that AP is being administered in RALP procedures without scientifically proven evidence. Prospective studies that apply consistent and uniform criteria for measuring infectious complications and antibiotic-related side effects are needed to ensure the comparability of results and guidance on AP in RALP.
PubMed: 38136777
DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12121744