-
International Wound Journal Jan 2024In this article, we analysed the therapeutic efficacy of open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) after operation for the treatment of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
In this article, we analysed the therapeutic efficacy of open radical prostatectomy (ORP) and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) after operation for the treatment of post-operation complications. In summary, because of the broad methodology of the available trials and the low number of trials, the data were limited. The investigators combined the results of six of the 211 original studies. We looked up 4 databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. A total of six publications were selected. The main result was the rate of post-operation wound complications. Secondary results were the time of operation and the duration of hospitalization. Our findings indicate that the minimal invasive operation can decrease the incidence of wound infections (OR, 0.61; 95% CI: 0.42,0.90, p = 0.01), bleeding (MD, -293.09; 95% CI: -431.48, -154.71, p < 0.0001), and length of stay in the hospital compared with open surgery (MD, -1.85; 95% CI: -3.52, -0.17, p = 0.03), but minimally invasive surgery increased patient operative time (MD, 51.45; 95% CI: 40.99, 61.92, p < 0.0001). Compared with the open operation, the microinvasive operation has the superiority in the treatment of the wound complications following the operation of radical prostatic carcinoma. But the operation time of the microinvasive operation is much longer. Furthermore, there is a certain amount of bias among the various studies, so it is important to be cautious in interpretation of the findings.
Topics: Humans; Male; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures; Postoperative Complications; Prostate; Prostatectomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37706271
DOI: 10.1111/iwj.14367 -
Urology Aug 2023To collate available data via systematic review considering etiology, presentation, and treatment of Uro-Symphyseal Fistula (USF) in order to inform a contemporary... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To collate available data via systematic review considering etiology, presentation, and treatment of Uro-Symphyseal Fistula (USF) in order to inform a contemporary management framework.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic review was performed according to the Cochrane Handbook and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021232954). MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases were searched for manuscripts considering USF published between 2000 and 2022. Full text manuscripts were reviewed for clinical data. Univariate statistical analysis was performed where possible.
RESULTS
A total of 31 manuscripts, comprising 248 USF cases, met inclusion criteria. Suprapubic pain and difficulty ambulating were common symptoms. MRI confirmed the diagnosis in 95% of cases. Radiotherapy for prostate cancer was the most common predisposing factor (93%). Among these patients, prior endoscopic bladder outlet surgery was common (83%; bladder neck incision/urethral dilatation n = 59, TURP/GLL PVP n = 34). In those with prior prostatic radiation, conservative management failed in 96% of cases. Cystectomy with urinary diversion (86% n = 184) was favored over bladder-sparing techniques (14% (n = 30) after prior radiation. In radiation naïve patients, conservative management failed in 72% of patients, resulting in either open fistula repair with flap (62%) or radical prostatectomy (28%).
CONCLUSION
Prior radiotherapy is a significant risk factor for USF and almost always requires definitive major surgery (debridement, cystectomy, and urinary diversion). On the basis of the findings within this systematic review, we present management principles that may assist clinicians with these complex cases. Further research into pathogenesis, prevention, and optimal treatment approach is required.
Topics: Male; Humans; Fistula; Cystectomy; Urinary Bladder; Urologic Surgical Procedures; Urinary Diversion; Urinary Fistula
PubMed: 37182647
DOI: 10.1016/j.urology.2023.05.002 -
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