-
World Journal of Urology Jun 2024The aim of this study is to critically evaluate the existing body of evidence regarding the efficacy of Retzius-sparing radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) in achieving...
PURPOSE
The aim of this study is to critically evaluate the existing body of evidence regarding the efficacy of Retzius-sparing radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) in achieving improved functional outcomes. Moreover, we explored possible strategies to further optimize functional outcomes.
METHODS
Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review (PROSPERO ID CRD42024539915) was performed on 9th September 2023 on PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Only original articles in the English language reporting functional outcomes after RS-RARP were included.
RESULTS
Overall, the search string yielded 99 results on PubMed, 122 on Scopus, and 120 on Web Of Science. After duplicate exclusion, initial screening and eligibility evaluation, a total of 47 studies were included in the qualitative analysis, corresponding to a cohort of 13.196 patients. All studies reported continence recovery. RS-RARP appeared to achieve better and faster continence recovery compared to S-RARP. However, it should be noted that continence definition was heterogeneous and not based on validated condition-specific questionnaires. Seven (15%) studies provided for any sort of rehabilitation for urinary incontinence after RS-RARP. 22 studies analyzed potency recovery rates, showing no difference between RS-RARP and S-RARP. The evaluation of this outcome poses a great challenge due to the lack of standardized assessment tools and reporting methods. Only two studies reported on the consistent use of post-operative PDE5i as penile rehabilitation.
CONCLUSIONS
The current review highlights the satisfactory functional results of Retzius-sparing robot assisted radical prostatectomy, which holds true irrespective of disease stage and prostate volume, with promising results even in patients previously treated for BPH or in the salvage setting. How can we optimize those results? The answer does not probably lie in further refinement of the surgical technique, but in giving greater attention to patient counselling and rehabilitation strategies in order to minimize regret and maximize satisfaction.
Topics: Prostatectomy; Humans; Male; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Prostatic Neoplasms; Organ Sparing Treatments; Recovery of Function; Urinary Incontinence; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38916624
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-024-05066-2 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Jun 2024This study aims to compare the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of perineal hydrodissection (HD) with standard treatment (ST) in patients undergoing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
A systematic review and meta-analysis of the role of perineal hydrodissection in perioperative, oncologic, and functional outcomes for patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
This study aims to compare the perioperative, oncological, and functional outcomes of perineal hydrodissection (HD) with standard treatment (ST) in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. We performed an exhaustive search in databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, seeking English-language studies relevant to our research question, with a cutoff date of April 2024. The pooled results were assessed using the weighted mean differences (WMDs), standardized mean differences (SMDs), and odds ratios (ORs) metrics. We also performed a sensitivity analysis. The meta-analysis was conducted utilizing Stata/MP version 18 software. The study was registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD 42024536400). We included a total of five studies (three RCTs and two retrospective studies). According to the data from the Meta-analysis, the HD group showed positive effects in promoting urinary continence (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.36, 5.12; p = 0.004 < 0.05) and erectile function (SMD 0.92, 95%CI 0.56, 1.27; p < 0.05) within 3 months after surgery. However, no notable disparities were observed in terms of operative time, estimated blood loss, bilateral nerve-sparing rate, or the rate of positive surgical margin. Perineal hydrodissection can be safely applied in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), offering a distinct advantage in functional outcomes compared to those who undergo standard robot-assisted prostatectomy alone.
Topics: Humans; Prostatectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Male; Perineum; Prostatic Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 38904929
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02028-z -
BMC Urology Jun 2024The aim of our study was to investigate the comparative outcomes of five different energy types on surgical efficacy and postoperative recovery in patients with benign... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study
PURPOSE
The aim of our study was to investigate the comparative outcomes of five different energy types on surgical efficacy and postoperative recovery in patients with benign prostate hyperplasia.
METHODS
The literature was systematically reviewed on December 1st, 2023, encompassing studies retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library databases that incorporated clinical studies of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), Thulium:YAG laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP), transurethral plasmakinetic enucleation of prostate (PKEP), diode laser enucleation of the prostate (DiLEP) and thulium fiber laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuFLEP) in the treatment of prostatic hyperplasia. Two independent reviewers extracted study data and conducted quality assessments using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Network meta-analysis (NMA) was employed to indirectly analyze the outcomes of endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (EEP) techniques.
RESULTS
The study included a total of 38 studies, comprising 21 non-randomized controlled trials (nRCTs) and 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), incorporating five distinct techniques: holmium laser, Thulium:YAG laser, bipolar plasma, diode laser and thulium fiber laser. In comparing treatment durations, ThuLEP and HoLEP had shorter overall hospital stays than PKEP, while the enucleation time of ThuLEP and HoLEP was shorter than that of ThuFLEP. Moreover, the enucleation tissue weight of both thulium fiber laser and holmium laser was heavier than bipolar plasma. However, the analysis did not reveal any statistically significant variation in complications among the various types of enucleation. In postoperative follow-up, the IPSS at 3 months post-operation was superior in the Thulium:YAG laser group compared to the holmium laser group. The thulium fiber laser technique demonstrated significant advantages over other enucleation methods in terms of QoL and PVR at 12 months after surgery.
CONCLUSION
Theoretical properties may vary among different energy sources; however, there are no discernible clinical differences in operation-related parameters, postoperative complications, and postoperative follow-up. Therefore, the choice of laser does not significantly impact the outcome. However, due to the limited number of included studies, future research should focus on larger sample sizes and multicenter investigations to further validate the findings of this study.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatic Hyperplasia; Network Meta-Analysis; Treatment Outcome; Laser Therapy; Prostatectomy; Lasers, Solid-State
PubMed: 38886739
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-024-01517-5 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Jun 2024Even though robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is superior to open surgery in reducing postoperative complications, 6-20% of patients still... (Review)
Review
Even though robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RARP) is superior to open surgery in reducing postoperative complications, 6-20% of patients still experience urinary incontinence (UI) after surgery. Therefore, many researchers have established predictive models for UI occurrence after RARP, but the predictive performance of these models is inconsistent. This study aims to systematically review and critically evaluate the published prediction models of UI risk for patients after RARP. We conducted a comprehensive literature search in the databases of PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Embase. Literature published from inception to March 20, 2024, which reported the development and/or validation of clinical prediction models for the occurrence of UI after RARP. We identified seven studies with eight models that met our inclusion criteria. Most of the studies used logistic regression models to predict the occurrence of UI after RARP. The most common predictors included age, body mass index, and nerve sparing procedure. The model performance ranged from poor to good, with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves ranging from 0.64 to 0.98 in studies. All the studies have a high risk of bias. Despite their potential for predicting UI after RARP, clinical prediction models are restricted by their limited accuracy and high risk of bias. In the future, the study design should be improved, the potential predictors should be considered from larger and representative samples comprehensively, and high-quality risk prediction models should be established. And externally validating models performance to enhance their clinical accuracy and applicability.
Topics: Humans; Prostatectomy; Urinary Incontinence; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Male; Laparoscopy; Postoperative Complications; ROC Curve; Body Mass Index
PubMed: 38869689
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02009-2 -
PloS One 2024We aimed to compare the prognostic values of 'localized treatment to the primary lesion (LT) plus hormone therapy (HT)' versus 'HT alone' in metastatic hormone-sensitive... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The prognostic significance of additional localized treatment to primary lesion in patients undergoing hormone therapy for metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
We aimed to compare the prognostic values of 'localized treatment to the primary lesion (LT) plus hormone therapy (HT)' versus 'HT alone' in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC).
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search through the databases of PubMed®, Web of Science®, and Cochrane library® in April 2023 based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement. A pooled meta-analysis was performed to assess the prognostic differences between LT + HT and HT alone according to randomized and non-randomized controlled studies (RCTs and NRCTs, respectively).
RESULTS
The search identified three RCTs and eight NRCTs. In RCTs, LT did not show prognostic benefits regarding biochemical-failure free rate nor overall survival (OS), although in patients with low tumor burdens, the LT + HT group showed better OS (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.54-0.86). In the NRCTs, the LT+HT group showed superior progression-free survival (hazard ratio (HR): 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21-0.87), cancer-specific survival (HR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.20-0.76), and OS (HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.57-0.69) to the HT alone group. In addition, better OS was observed in the LT +HT group regardless of the type of treatment modality for LT; radical prostatectomy (HR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.39-0.69), radiotherapy (HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.56-0.71) in NRCTs.
CONCLUSIONS
LT to the primary lesion in metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer may provide prognostic benefits and especially in patients with low tumor burden.
Topics: Humans; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prognosis; Neoplasm Metastasis; Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal
PubMed: 38857208
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0304963 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Jun 2024The purpose of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of the perioperative outcomes associated with robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RARP) versus... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Comparative analysis of perioperative outcomes in obese patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus open radical prostatectomy (ORP): a systematic review and meta-analysis.
The purpose of this study was to conduct a comparative analysis of the perioperative outcomes associated with robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RARP) versus open radical prostatectomy (ORP) in the obese population diagnosed with prostate cancer. We performed a comprehensive search in key databases such as PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, encompassing studies of all languages, with a final search date of April 2024. We also omitted articles that consisted of conference abstracts and content that was not pertinent to our study. The aggregated outcomes were evaluated utilizing the metrics of weighted mean differences (WMDs) and odds ratios (ORs). A sensitivity analysis was also integrated into our assessment. The meta-analysis was facilitated by employing Stata/MP version 18 software. Additionally, the study was duly registered with PROSPERO under the identifier: CRD 42024540216. This meta-analysis, which included five trials, shows that compared to ORP, RARP is associated with a reduced estimated blood loss (EBL) (WMD -445.77, 95%CI -866.08, -25.45; p = 0.038), a decreased transfusion rate (OR 0.17, 95%CI 0.13, 0.21; p < 0.001), and a diminished overall complication rate (OR 0.71, 95%CI 0.58, 0.86; p = 0.001). No statistically significant differences were found in operative time (OT) (WMD 1.88, 95%CI -46.53, 50.28; p = 0.939) or length of stay (LOS) (WMD -0.41, 95%CI -1.07, 0.25; p = 0.221). Among patients with obesity and prostate cancer, RARP demonstrates advantages over ORP by reducing estimated blood loss, transfusion requirements, and the incidence of complications. Notably, there were no significant differences in operative duration and hospital stay between the two surgical approaches. These findings suggest that RARP could be a preferable surgical option for obese individuals with prostate cancer.
Topics: Humans; Prostatectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Male; Obesity; Prostatic Neoplasms; Length of Stay; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Blood Loss, Surgical; Laparoscopy; Operative Time; Blood Transfusion
PubMed: 38856862
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-02010-9 -
European Urology Oncology May 2024Current management options for localized prostate cancer (PCa) include radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy (RT), and active surveillance (AS). Despite comparable... (Review)
Review
Patient-reported Outcome Measures and Experience Measures After Active Surveillance Versus Radiation Therapy Versus Radical Prostatectomy for Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review of Prospective Comparative Studies.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Current management options for localized prostate cancer (PCa) include radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy (RT), and active surveillance (AS). Despite comparable oncological outcomes, there is still lack of evidence on their comparative effectiveness in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs). We conducted a systematic review of studies comparing PROMs and PREMs after all recommended management options for localized PCa (RP, RT, AS).
METHODS
A literature search was performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL databases in accordance with recommendations from the European Association of Urology Guidelines Office and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. All prospective clinical trials reporting PROMs and/or PREMs for comparisons of RP versus RT versus AS were included. A narrative synthesis was used to summarize the review findings. No quantitative synthesis was performed because of the heterogeneity and limitations of the studies available.
KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS
Our findings reveal that RP mostly affects urinary continence and sexual function, with better results for voiding symptoms in comparison to other treatments. RT was associated with greater impairment of bowel function and voiding symptoms. None of the treatments had a significant impact on mental or physical quality of life. Only a few studies reported PREMs, with a high rate of decision regret for all modalities (up to 23%).
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
All recommended treatments for localized PCa have an impact on PROMs and PREMs, but for different domains and with differing severity. We found significant heterogeneity in PROM collection, so standardization in real-world practice and clinical trials is warranted. Only a few studies have reported PREMs, highlighting an unmet need that should be explored in future studies.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We reviewed differences in patient reports of their outcomes and experiences after surgical prostate removal, radiotherapy, or active surveillance for prostate cancer. We found differences in the effects on urinary, bowel, and sexual functions among the treatments, but no difference for mental or physical quality of life. Our results can help doctors and prostate cancer patients in shared decision-making.
PubMed: 38816298
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2024.05.008 -
Clinical Genitourinary Cancer Aug 2024High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is regarded as a promising alternative treatment option for localized prostate cancer (PCa) as it has been proposed to offer...
INTRODUCTION
High-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) is regarded as a promising alternative treatment option for localized prostate cancer (PCa) as it has been proposed to offer similar oncologic control to the standard of care, but with significantly reduced treatment-related side effects. This systematic literature review assesses the available evidence of whole-gland HIFU as primary treatment for localized PCa.
METHODS
MEDLINE (PubMed) was searched for studies investigating oncological and functional outcomes following whole-gland HIFU as primary treatment for localized PCa. Our primary outcomes for the review were biochemical disease-free survival rates (BDFS), overall and PCa-specific survival rates as well as negative biopsy rates. Our secondary outcomes were functional results and complications of the treatment.
RESULTS
A total of 375 articles were identified, of which 35 were included in the present review. All 35 articles were prospective or retrospective case series. Mean/median duration of follow-up across studies was 10.9 to 94 months, and 6618 patients were included in the review. The BDFS rate varied greatly across studies from 21.7% to 89.2% during follow-up. The 10-year PCa-specific survival rate following HIFU was 90%, 99%, and 100% in 3 studies. Negative biopsy rates post-HIFU ranged from 20% to 92.7% across studies. Common side effects to HIFU included urinary incontinence (grade 1: 0%-22.7%), erectile dysfunction (11.6%-77.1%), urinary tract infections (1.5%-47.9%), and bladder outlet obstruction mainly as urethral strictures (7%-41.2%).
CONCLUSION
Great variation in oncological and functional outcomes was seen across studies. More prospective trials are needed before whole-gland HIFU can be considered as a treatment option for localized PCa.
Topics: Humans; Male; Disease-Free Survival; High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound Ablation; Prostatic Neoplasms; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasound, High-Intensity Focused, Transrectal
PubMed: 38811288
DOI: 10.1016/j.clgc.2024.102101 -
Cureus Apr 2024There is controversy regarding the most effective primary treatment of choice for prostate cancer (PCa) in terms of patient outcomes, such as surgery or radiotherapy... (Review)
Review
Assessing the Efficacy and Long-Term Outcomes of Surgical Intervention Versus Radiotherapy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prostate Cancer Treatment Modalities.
There is controversy regarding the most effective primary treatment of choice for prostate cancer (PCa) in terms of patient outcomes, such as surgery or radiotherapy (RT). This study evaluated the comparative efficacy and long-term outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) and RT for PCa treatment. A thorough literature review of relevant databases was conducted, focusing on academic and clinical studies published from 2019 onwards. The inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and other observational studies comparing survival outcomes in patients treated with surgery and RT. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to provide an overview of the data. We selected 19 studies based on the inclusion criteria. Of the total 19 studies, 12 advocated RP as the preferred treatment to improve survival outcomes in patients with PCa. The results of our synthesis showed that prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) was lower in patients treated with RT. The total effect size for the analysis was calculated as Z=1.19 (p-value=0.23). The heterogeneity in the studies was as follows: Tau2=0.09, Chi2=20.25, df=4, I2=80%. Moreover, overall survival (OS) was shown to be higher in patients who underwent prostatectomy. The combined effect for the analysis was found to be: HR=0.97 (0.93, 1.01). The total effect was calculated as Z=1.33 (p-value= 0.18). The heterogeneity was found to be Tau2=0.00, Chi2=1.33, df=2, and I2=0%. However, overall mortality (OM) was shown to be independent of the treatment modality. RT is the preferred strategy for PCa treatment, as it balances efficacy and long-term outcomes. Clinical decision-making should consider individual patient characteristics and future research should delve into specific subpopulations and long-term outcomes to further refine the treatment guidelines.
PubMed: 38784314
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.58842 -
European Urology May 2024Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogeneous disease state. While BCR is associated with worse oncologic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Biochemical recurrence (BCR) after primary definitive treatment for prostate cancer (PCa) is a heterogeneous disease state. While BCR is associated with worse oncologic outcomes, risk factors that impact outcomes can vary significantly, necessitating avenues for risk stratification. We sought to identify prognostic risk factors at the time of recurrence after primary radical prostatectomy or radiotherapy, and prior to salvage treatment(s), associated with adverse oncologic outcomes.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review of prospective studies in EMBASE, MEDLINE, and ClinicalTrials.gov (from January 1, 2000 to October 16, 2023) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines (CRD42023466330). We reviewed the factors associated with oncologic outcomes among patients with BCR after primary definitive treatment.
KEY FINDINGS AND LIMITATIONS
A total of 37 studies were included (total n = 10 632), 25 after prostatectomy (total n = 9010) and 12 after radiotherapy (total n = 1622). Following recurrence after prostatectomy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include higher pathologic T stage and grade group, negative surgical margins, shorter prostate-specific antigen doubling time (PSADT), higher prostate-specific antigen (PSA) prior to salvage treatment, shorter time to recurrence, the 22-gene tumor RNA signature, and recurrence location on molecular imaging. After recurrence following radiotherapy, factors associated with adverse outcomes include a shorter time to recurrence, and shorter PSADT or higher PSA velocity. Grade group, T stage, and prior short-term hormone therapy (4-6 mo) were not clearly associated with adverse outcomes, although sample size and follow-up were generally limited compared with postprostatectomy data.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS
This work highlights the recommendations and level of evidence for risk stratifying patients with PCa recurrence, and can be used as a benchmark for personalizing salvage treatment based on prognostics.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We summarize the data from previously reported clinical trials on the topic of which factors predict worse cancer outcomes for patients who recur with prostate cancer after their initial treatment.
PubMed: 38782697
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2024.04.034