-
Urologic Oncology Oct 2019Evidence-based medicine was widely used in the context of diverse surgical treatments through several systematic reviews (SR). Despite the high level of evidence from...
CONTEXT
Evidence-based medicine was widely used in the context of diverse surgical treatments through several systematic reviews (SR). Despite the high level of evidence from these reviews, the specificity of the analyzed outcomes makes it difficult to establish the state of maturity of the analyzed technique neglecting significant bias.
OBJECTIVE
To describe a novel SR methodology based on a temporal population analysis in a Reverse Systematic Review utilizing the case of well-established laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematized search was performed in order to obtain the primary studies feeding SR for the composition of a complete database, covering clinical-surgical and bibliometric variables. Quantitative, qualitative, and temporal correlations of studies variables were performed to determine trends regarding results, geographic distribution and bibliometrics to delineate the development and trends of LRP between 2000 and 2017.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Among a total of 353 SR found, 40 were included and provided 238 primary studies elected to the database composition. An accumulation of studies was found on the Europe-USA axis predominantly in 4 preeminent scientific journals, which scientifically influenced the profile of publications, mainly until 2011 when interest clearly migrates to robotic-assisted surgery reducing the influence of these centers in the development of LRP in an upfront reversal in the standard of publications with a clear shift between LRP and robotic-assisted surgery studies. Operative time, blood loss, and conversion to open surgery showed trend to reduction and only biochemical recurrence (among PENTAFECTA) positively correlated with the year of publication, all with stabilization throughout the period.
CONCLUSION
The Reverse Systematic Review proved to be feasible and effective in demonstrating the evolution of a surgical technique, outlining its "Natural History," which is not captured in the standard SR. In addition, it allowed to identify the presence of scientific influencers and potential biases in the composition of the best evidence in the literature, as well as to trace the curves of development until its technical-scientific maturity. Further studies to test the reproducibility of this methodology may aid in the comparison of diverse surgical techniques. Patient summary: This temporal study analyzed the variables inherent to the publications and the patients in the primary studies of SRs that approached a specific surgical technique. The results demonstrated the scientific maturity of the technique and the vulnerability to scientific influencers in the history of its development.
Topics: Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Middle Aged; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 31280983
DOI: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2019.06.004 -
BJU International Jul 2016To evaluate the influence of posterior musculofascial plate reconstruction (PR) on early return of continence after radical prostatectomy (RP); an updated systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
To evaluate the influence of posterior musculofascial plate reconstruction (PR) on early return of continence after radical prostatectomy (RP); an updated systematic review of the literature. A systematic review of the literature was performed in June 2015, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement and searching Medline, Embase, Scopus and Web of Science databases. We searched the terms posterior reconstruction prostatectomy, double layer anastomosis prostatectomy across the 'Title' and 'Abstract' fields of the records, with the following limits: humans, gender (male), and language (English). 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. A meta-analysis of the risk ratios estimated using data from the selected studies was performed. In all, 21 studies were identified, including three randomised controlled trials. The overall analysis of comparative studies showed that PR improved early continence recovery at 3-7, 30, and 90 days after catheter removal, while the continence rate at 180 days was statistically but not clinically affected. Statistically significantly lower anastomotic leakage rates were described after PR. There were no significant differences for positive surgical margins rates or for complications such as acute urinary retention and bladder neck stricture. The analysis confirms the benefits at 30 days after catheter removal already discussed in the review published in 2012, but also shows a significant advantage in terms of urinary continence recovery in the first 90 days. A multicentre prospective randomised controlled trial is currently being conducted in several institutions around the world to better assess the effectiveness of PR in facilitating an earlier recovery of postoperative urinary continence.
Topics: Humans; Male; Muscle, Striated; Postoperative Complications; Prostatectomy; Urinary Incontinence; Urologic Surgical Procedures, Male
PubMed: 26991606
DOI: 10.1111/bju.13480 -
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases Dec 2015Acute urinary retention (AUR) is a common urological emergency. In this article, we review the current literature and present a structured summary in management of AUR. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Acute urinary retention (AUR) is a common urological emergency. In this article, we review the current literature and present a structured summary in management of AUR.
METHODS
A systematic review was conducted using the keywords 'acute AND retention AND urin*' within the title in search engines including Medline, EMBASE and EBM Review. The obtained literature was manually reviewed by the primary author (PDY) and was further refined by confining the subject to management of AUR. Exclusion criteria included paediatric and female population studies, case reports, reviews, surveys, economical assessment and articles on AUR in prostate cancer and post-operative patients.
RESULTS
Total of 54 articles met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. The trial without catheter (TWOC) post-immediate catheterisation is widely practiced although there remains a significant variability in terms of type and duration of catheterisation required, use of concurrent medical therapy or post-catheterisation management. Our systematic review and subsequent meta-analysis has shown superiority of α1-adrenergic receptor blockers over placebo in achieving successful voiding in patients with AUR. Suprapubic catheter (SPC) is an alternative to urethral catheterisation (indwelling catheter (IDC)) and may provide several advantages. Clean intermittent self-catheterisation may be a safe and useful option for patients with AUR until their definitive management. The overall long-term outcome of in-and-out catheterisation remains promising in selected patients. Surgery is an end point in patients with unsuccessful TWOC as well as in those with significant lower urinary tract symptoms post-successful TWOC.
CONCLUSIONS
We recommend use of α1-adrenergic receptor blockers before TWOC and discourage emergency operative management. Use of SPC over IDC in AUR is debatable. Duration of catheterisation is controversial but <3 days is a safe option in avoiding catheterisation-related complications. Although TURP remains the current gold standard, there has been an emergence of newer operative management utilising laser techniques.
Topics: 5-alpha Reductase Inhibitors; Acute Disease; Adrenergic alpha-1 Receptor Antagonists; Disease Management; Humans; Male; Odds Ratio; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Catheterization; Urinary Retention
PubMed: 26195469
DOI: 10.1038/pcan.2015.15 -
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 -
European Urology Sep 2012Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) was proposed to improve functional outcomes in comparison with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) was proposed to improve functional outcomes in comparison with retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) or laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). In the initial RARP series, 12-mo urinary continence recovery rates ranged from 84% to 97%. However, the few available studies comparing RARP with RRP or LRP published before 2008 did not permit any definitive conclusions about the superiority of any one of these techniques in terms of urinary continence recovery.
OBJECTIVE
The aims of this systematic review were (1) to evaluate the prevalence and risk factors for urinary incontinence after RARP, (2) to identify surgical techniques able to improve urinary continence recovery after RARP, and (3) to perform a cumulative analysis of all available studies comparing RARP versus RRP or LRP in terms of the urinary continence recovery rate.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A literature search was performed in August 2011 using the Medline, Embase, and Web of Science databases. The Medline search included only a free-text protocol using the term radical prostatectomy across the title and abstract fields of the records. The following limits were used: humans; gender (male); and publication date from January 1, 2008. Searches of the Embase and Web of Science databases used the same free-text protocol, keywords, and search period. Only comparative studies or clinical series including >100 cases reporting urinary continence outcomes were included in this review. Cumulative analysis was conducted using the Review Manager v.4.2 software designed for composing Cochrane Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration, Oxford, UK).
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
We analyzed 51 articles reporting urinary continence rates after RARP: 17 case series, 17 studies comparing different techniques in the context of RARP, 9 studies comparing RARP with RRP, and 8 studies comparing RARP with LRP. The 12-mo urinary incontinence rates ranged from 4% to 31%, with a mean value of 16% using a no pad definition. Considering a no pad or safety pad definition, the incidence ranged from 8% to 11%, with a mean value of 9%. Age, body mass index, comorbidity index, lower urinary tract symptoms, and prostate volume were the most relevant preoperative predictors of urinary incontinence after RARP. Only a few comparative studies evaluated the impact of different surgical techniques on urinary continence recovery after RARP. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction with or without anterior reconstruction was associated with a small advantage in urinary continence recovery 1 mo after RARP. Only complete reconstruction was associated with a significant advantage in urinary continence 3 mo after RARP (odds ratio [OR]: 0.76; p=0.04). Cumulative analyses showed a better 12-mo urinary continence recovery after RARP in comparison with RRP (OR: 1.53; p=0.03) or LRP (OR: 2.39; p=0.006).
CONCLUSIONS
The prevalence of urinary incontinence after RARP is influenced by preoperative patient characteristics, surgeon experience, surgical technique, and methods used to collect and report data. Posterior musculofascial reconstruction seems to offer a slight advantage in terms of 1-mo urinary continence recovery. Update of a previous systematic review of literature shows, for the first time, a statistically significant advantage in favor of RARP in comparison with both RRP and LRP in terms of 12-mo urinary continence recovery.
Topics: Chi-Square Distribution; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Laparoscopy; Male; Odds Ratio; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Recovery of Function; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Robotics; Surgery, Computer-Assisted; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Bladder; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 22749852
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.045 -
Prostate Cancer and Prostatic Diseases Sep 2023Current guidelines recommend simple prostatectomy or endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) as treatment of choice for bladder prostatic obstruction (BPO) caused... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Current guidelines recommend simple prostatectomy or endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) as treatment of choice for bladder prostatic obstruction (BPO) caused by large prostate glands. We aimed to provide a wide-ranging analysis of the currently available evidence, comparing safety and effectiveness of robot-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) versus open simple prostatectomy (OSP), laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP), and laser EEP.
METHODS
A systematic search was performed across MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases for retrospective and prospective studies comparing RASP to OSP or LSP or laser EEP (HoLEP/ThuLEP). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) recommendations were followed to design the search strategies, selection criteria, and evidence report. A meta-analysis evaluated perioperative safety and effectiveness outcomes. The weighted mean difference and risk ratio were used to compare continuous and dichotomous variables, respectively. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for RCT article assessing risk of bias.
RESULTS
15 studies, including 6659 patients, were selected for meta-analysis: 13 observational studies, 1 non-randomized prospective study, and 1 randomized controlled trial. RASP was associated with statistically significant longer operative time (OT) and lower postoperative complication rate, length of stay (LOS), estimated blood loss (EBL), and transfusion rate (TR) compared to OSP. LSP showed longer LOS and lower postoperative SHIM score, with no difference in OT, EBL, and complications. Compared to laser EEP, RASP presented longer LOS and catheterization time and higher TR. ThuLEP presented shorter OT than RASP. No difference were found in functional outcomes between groups both subjectively (IPSS, QoL) and objectively (Qmax, PVR).
CONCLUSION
RASP has become a size-independent treatment for the management of BPO caused by a large prostate gland. It can duplicate the functional outcomes of OSP while offering a better safety profile. When compared to LSP, the latter still stands as a valid lower-cost option, but it requires solid laparoscopic skill sets and therefore it is unlikely to spread on larger scale. When compared to laser EEP, RASP offers a shorter learning curve, but it still suffers from longer catheterization time and LOS.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prospective Studies; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Quality of Life; Retrospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Treatment Outcome; Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36402815
DOI: 10.1038/s41391-022-00616-4 -
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 -
Neurourology and Urodynamics Sep 2013Urethral sphincter incompetence is generally considered to be the most important contributing factor to post-radical prostatectomy incontinence (PRPI). The value of... (Review)
Review
AIMS
Urethral sphincter incompetence is generally considered to be the most important contributing factor to post-radical prostatectomy incontinence (PRPI). The value of various assessment techniques used to objectify urethral sphincter function before and/or after RP is unclear. Our review addresses the following questions: In men having to undergo RP, which measurement techniques that assess pre-operative and post-operative urethral sphincter function have predictive value for the post-operative continence status or correlate with the post-operative continence status.
METHODS
A systematic and comprehensive search was performed using the terms: urethral sphincter, radical prostatectomy (RP), and urinary incontinence. Results were restricted to English-language papers published between 1980 and March 2012. Only techniques described by at least two studies were included.
RESULTS
Several assessment techniques for urethral sphincter function and anatomy were identified: sphincter electromyography, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), perfusion sphincterometry and urethral pressure profilometry (UPP). A shorter urethral sphincter length on preoperative endorectal MRI might be associated with an increased risk of PRPI as well as longer time to achieve continence. UPP showed that both maximum urethral closure pressure (MUCP) and functional profile length (FPL) decrease significantly after RRP. Low preoperative MUCP and FPL are associated with an increased risk of PRPI. The other mentioned assessment techniques are not usable as preoperative diagnostic tools.
CONCLUSIONS
MRI and UPP might be valuable preoperative diagnostic tools in patients waiting for RRP. However, more and larger studies are needed to show the exact role of MRI and UPP in the preoperative management of patients waiting for RRP and for whom post-operative incontinence is a big concern.
Topics: Diagnostic Techniques, Urological; Humans; Male; Predictive Value of Tests; Prostatectomy; Risk Factors; Treatment Outcome; Urethra; Urethral Diseases; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 23371847
DOI: 10.1002/nau.22355 -
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 -
European Urology Dec 2017Current evidence-based management for clinically localised prostate cancer includes active surveillance, surgery, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy.... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
CONTEXT
Current evidence-based management for clinically localised prostate cancer includes active surveillance, surgery, external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) and brachytherapy. The impact of these treatment modalities on quality of life (QoL) is uncertain.
OBJECTIVE
To systematically review comparative studies investigating disease-specific QoL outcomes as assessed by validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures with at least 1 yr of follow-up after primary treatment for clinically localised prostate cancer.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant studies. Studies were critically appraised for the risk of bias. A narrative synthesis was undertaken.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Of 11486 articles identified, 18 studies were eligible for inclusion, including three randomised controlled trials (RCTs; follow-up range: 60-72 mo) and 15 nonrandomised comparative studies (follow-up range: 12-180 mo) recruiting a total of 13604 patients. Two RCTs recruited small cohorts and only one was judged to have a low risk of bias. The quality of evidence from observational studies was low to moderate. For a follow-up of up to 6 yr, active surveillance was found to have the lowest impact on cancer-specific QoL, surgery had a negative impact on urinary and sexual function when compared with active surveillance and EBRT, and EBRT had a negative impact on bowel function when compared with active surveillance and surgery. Data from one small RCT reported that brachytherapy has a negative impact on urinary function 1 yr post-treatment, but no significant urinary toxicity was reported at 5 yr.
CONCLUSIONS
This is the first systematic review comparing the impact of different primary treatments on cancer-specific QoL for men with clinically localised prostate cancer, using validated cancer-specific patient-reported outcome measures only. There is robust evidence that choice of primary treatment for localised prostate cancer has distinct impacts on patients' QoL. This should be discussed in detail with patients during pretreatment counselling.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Our review of the current evidence suggests that for a period of up to 6 yr after treatment, men with localised prostate cancer who were managed with active surveillance reported high levels of quality of life (QoL). Men treated with surgery reported mainly urinary and sexual problems, while those treated with external beam radiotherapy reported mainly bowel problems. Men eligible for brachytherapy reported urinary problems up to a year after therapy, but then their QoL returned gradually to as it was before treatment.
Topics: Brachytherapy; Humans; Male; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Prostatectomy; Prostatic Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Radiotherapy; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 28757301
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.06.035