Geoff Coughlin

Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy: Perioperative Outcomes of 1500 Cases

BACKGROUND Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) is an evolving minimally invasive treatment of for localized prostate cancer. We present our experience of 1500 consecutive cases with an analysis of perioperative outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS Fifteen hundred consecutive RALPs were performed by a single surgeon (VRP). Following Institutional Review Board approval, clinical coordinators performed prospective intraoperative and postoperative data collection. Functional outcomes were assessed using validated self-administered questionnaires. RESULTS Mean OR time from skin incision to fascial closure (the time that the surgeon was present) was 105 minutes (55-300). Mean EBL was 111 cc (50-500). Ninety-seven percent of patients were discharged home on postoperative day 1. The overall complication rate was 4.3% with no mortalities. The positive margin rate (PMR) was 9.3% overall. PMR was 4% for pT2, 34% for T3 and 40% for pathologic stage T4. CONCLUSIONS Our initial series represents one of the largest published series for perioperative outcomes of robotic assisted prostatectomy. Our data demonstrates the feasibility, safety and efficacy of the procedure.

Early complication rates in a single-surgeon series of 2500 robotic-assisted radical prostatectomies: report applying a standardized grading system.

BACKGROUND Perioperative complications following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) have been previously reported in recent series. Few studies, however, have used standardized systems to classify surgical complications, and that inconsistency has hampered accurate comparisons between different series or surgical approaches. OBJECTIVE To assess trends in the incidence and to classify perioperative surgical complications following RARP in 2500 consecutive patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS We analyzed 2500 patients who underwent RARP for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa) from August 2002 to February 2009. Data were prospectively collected in a customized database and retrospectively analyzed. INTERVENTION All patients underwent RARP performed by a single surgeon. MEASUREMENTS The data were collected prospectively in a customized database. Complications were classified using the Clavien grading system. To evaluate trends regarding complications and radiologic anastomotic leaks, we compared eight groups of 300 patients each, categorized according the surgeons experience (number of cases). RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS Our median operative time was 90min (interquartile range [IQR]: 75-100min). The median estimated blood loss was 100ml (IQR:100-150ml). Our conversion rate was 0.08%, comprising two procedures converted to standard laparoscopy due to robot malfunction. One hundred and forty complications were observed in 127 patients (5.08%). The following percentages of patients presented graded complications: grade 1, 2.24%; grade 2, 1.8%; grade 3a, 0.08%; grade 3b, 0.48%; grade 4a, 0.40%. There were no cases of multiple organ dysfunction or death (grades 4b and 5). There were significant decreases in the overall complication rates (p=0.0034) and in the number of anastomotic leaks (p<0.001) as the surgeons experience increased. CONCLUSIONS RARP is a safe option for treatment of clinically localized PCa, presenting low complication rates in experienced hands. Although the robotic system provides the surgeon with enhanced vision and dexterity, proficiency is only accomplished with consistent surgical volume; complication rates demonstrated a tendency to decrease as the surgeons experience increased.

Continence, potency and oncological outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: early trifecta results of a high-volume surgeon

Study Type – Therapy (case series)
Level of Evidence 4

Positive surgical margins after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: A multi-institutional study

PURPOSE Positive surgical margins are an independent predictive factor for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. We analyzed the incidence of and associative factors for positive surgical margins in a multi-institutional series of 8,418 robotic assisted radical prostatectomies. MATERIALS AND METHODS We analyzed the records of 8,418 patients who underwent robotic assisted radical prostatectomy at 7 institutions. Of the patients 323 had missing data on margin status. Positive surgical margins were categorized into 4 groups, including apex, bladder neck, posterolateral and multifocal. The records of 6,169 patients were available for multivariate analysis. The variables entered into the logistic regression models were age, body mass index, preoperative prostate specific antigen, biopsy Gleason score, prostate weight and pathological stage. A second model was built to identify predictive factors for positive surgical margins in the subset of patients with organ confined disease (pT2). RESULTS The overall positive surgical margin rate was 15.7% (1,272 of 8,095 patients). The positive surgical margin rate for pT2 and pT3 disease was 9.45% and 37.2%, respectively. On multivariate analysis pathological stage (pT2 vs pT3 OR 4.588, p<0.001) and preoperative prostate specific antigen (4 or less vs greater than 10 ng/ml OR 2.918, p<0.001) were the most important independent predictive factors for positive surgical margins after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. Increasing prostate weight was associated with a lower risk of positive surgical margins after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (OR 0.984, p<0.001) and a higher body mass index was associated with a higher risk of positive surgical margins (OR 1.032, p<0.001). For organ confined disease preoperative prostate specific antigen was the most important factor that independently correlated with positive surgical margins (4 or less vs greater than 10 ng/ml OR 3.8, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS The prostatic apex followed by a posterolateral site was the most common location of positive surgical margins after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy. Factors that correlated with cancer aggressiveness, such as pathological stage and preoperative prostate specific antigen, were the most important factors independently associated with an increased risk of positive surgical margins after robotic assisted radical prostatectomy.

Robotic Equipment Malfunction During Robotic Prostatectomy: A Multi-institutional Study

PURPOSE Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) is growing in popularity as a treatment option for prostate cancer. As a new technology, little is known regarding the reliability of the da Vinci robotic system. Intraoperative robotic equipment malfunction may force the surgeon to convert the procedure to an open or pure laparoscopic procedure, or possibly even abort the procedure. We report the first large-scale, multi-institutional review of robotic equipment malfunction. MATERIALS AND METHODS A questionnaire was designed to evaluate the rate of perioperative robotic malfunction during RALP. High-volume, experienced surgeons were asked to complete this evaluation based on the analysis of their data. Questions included the overall number of RALPs performed, the number of equipment malfunctions, the number of procedures that had to be converted or aborted, and the part of the robotic system that malfunctioned. RESULTS Eleven institutions participated in the study with a median surgeon volume of 700 cases, accounting for a total case volume of 8240. Critical failure occurred in 34 cases (0.4%) leading to the cancellation of 24 cases prior to the procedure, and the conversion to two laparoscopic and eight open procedures. The most common components of the robot to malfunction were the arms and optical system. CONCLUSIONS Critical robotic equipment malfunction is extremely rare in institutions that perform high volumes of RALPs, with a nonrecoverable malfunction rate of only 0.4%.

Modified technique of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy: advantages of a vesico-urethral anastomosis

Study Type – Therapy (case series)

Surgery Illustrated--focus on details. Modified posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter: application to robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.

Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) is being performed more frequently as a treatment for presumed localized prostate cancer. With the stage migration that has occurred in prostate cancer diagnosis, urologists are now frequently treating younger men with organ-confined disease, who have good preoperative urinary and sexual function [1]. As the recovery period shortens, issues such as urinary incontinence play a larger role in the patient’s perception of recovery. Surgeons are making technical modifications to their surgical approach to improve ‘early continence’ after prostatectomy.In 2001, Rocco F. et al. [2] described a technique for posterior reconstruction of the rhabdosphincter. This entailed a two-layered reconstruction with apposition of the free edge of Denovilliers’ fascia and the posterior bladder with the posterior aspect of the

The use of (68 ) Ga-PSMA PET CT in men with biochemical recurrence after definitive treatment of acinar prostate cancer.

Early localisation of disease recurrence after definitive treatment of prostate cancer is vital to determine suitability for salvage treatment. Our aim was to further investigate the relationship between prostate specific antigen (PSA) level and detection of suspected cancer recurrence using 68 Ga‐PSMA PET/CT in patients with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy, particularly at low PSA levels.

The prognostic significance of the 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grading system for prostate cancer

Summary The 2005 International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) modified Gleason grading system was further amended in 2014 with the establishment of grade groupings (ISUP grading). This study examined the predictive value of ISUP grading, comparing results with recognised prognostic parameters. Of 3700 men undergoing radical prostatectomy (RP) reported at Aquesta Pathology between 2008 and 2013, 2079 also had a positive needle biopsy available for review. We examined the association between needle biopsy 2014 ISUP grade and 2005 modified Gleason score, tumour volume, pathological stage of the subsequent RP tumour, as well as biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS). The median age was 62 (range 32–79 years). Median serum prostate specific antigen was 5.9 (range 0.4–69 ng/mL). For needle biopsies, 280 (13.5%), 1031 (49.6%), 366 (17.6%), 77 (3.7%) and 325 (15.6%) were 2014 ISUP grades 1–5, respectively. Needle biopsy 2014 ISUP grade showed a significant association with RP tumour volume (p < 0.001), TNM pT and N stage (p < 0.001) and BRFS (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis using Cox proportional hazards regression model showed serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) at the time of diagnosis and ISUP grade >2 to be significantly associated with BRFS. This study provides evidence of the prognostic significance of ISUP grading for thin core needle biopsy of prostate.

A randomised trial of robotic and open prostatectomy in men with localised prostate cancer

BackgroundProstate cancer is the most common male cancer in the Western world however there is ongoing debate about the optimal treatment strategy for localised disease. While surgery remains the most commonly received treatment for localised disease in Australia more recently a robotic approach has emerged as an alternative to open and laparoscopic surgery. However, high level data is not yet available to support this as a superior approach or to guide treatment decision making between the alternatives. This paper presents the design of a randomised trial of Robotic and Open Prostatectomy for men newly diagnosed with localised prostate cancer that seeks to answer this question.Methods/design200 men per treatment arm (400 men in total) are being recruited after diagnosis and before treatment through a major public hospital outpatient clinic and randomised to 1) Robotic Prostatectomy or 2) Open Prostatectomy. All robotic prostatectomies are being performed by one surgeon and all open prostatectomies are being performed by one other surgeon. Outcomes are being measured pre-operatively and at 6 weeks and 3, 6, 12 and 24 months post-surgery. Oncological outcomes are being related to positive surgical margins, biochemical recurrence +/− the need for further treatment. Non-oncological outcome measures include: pain, physical and mental functioning, fatigue, summary (preference-based utility scores) and domain-specific QoL (urinary incontinence, bowel function and erectile function), cancer specific distress, psychological distress, decision-related distress and time to return to usual activities. Cost modelling of each approach, as well as full economic appraisal, is also being undertaken.DiscussionThe study will provide recommendations about the relative benefits of Robotic and Open Prostatectomy to support informed patient decision making about treatment for localised prostate cancer; and to assist in treatment services planning for this patient group.Trial registrationACTRN12611000661976