Kevin Horton

Prospective Comparison Between the AirSeal® System Valve-Less Trocar and a Standard Versaport™ Plus V2 Trocar in Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE To prospectively compare the AirSeal® System valve-less Trocar with a standard Versaport™ Plus V2 Trocar as assistant insufflating port in transperitoneal and extraperitoneal robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (t-RARP/e-RARP). PATIENTS AND METHODS Two consecutive cohorts of patients undergoing RARP using either a 12 mm AirSeal valve-less Trocar (n=19 [14 t-RARP/5 e-RARP]) or a 12 mm Versaport Plus V2 Trocar (n=17 [11 t-RARP/6 e-RARP]) were prospectively evaluated. Age, body mass index, tumor characteristics, and surgical approach were similar in both cohorts. Besides relevant clinical data, episodes of pressure loss (<8 mm Hg), the number of necessary trocar manipulations, the frequency of camera cleaning, and overall carbon dioxide (CO2) consumption were recorded and compared. RESULTS Mean surgical time was 175 minutes in the AirSeal and 166 minutes in the Versaport group (p=0.55). Whereas in the AirSeal group, only one episode of pressure loss <8 mm Hg was observed; this occurred in mean 38 times in the Versaport group (p<0.0001). No trocar manipulations for specimen or needle retrieval were necessary in the AirSeal group in contrast to in mean 15 in the Versaport group (p<0.0001). Otherwise, no appreciable differences regarding overall operating time, blood loss, camera cleaning, or overall CO2 consumption were observed for the present study. Patient CO2 absorption was not evaluated. CONCLUSIONS In the present study, the AirSeal Trocar offered a more stable pneumocavity and facilitated specimen retrieval and needle extraction.

Single-centre evaluation of the extraperitoneal and transperitoneal approach in robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy

Abstract Objective. Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is feasible using either an extraperitoneal (EP) or a transperitoneal (TP) approach. This study reports on the experience of a single hospital using both techniques. Material and methods. From July 2009 to March 2011, 170 patients underwent RARP. EP was chosen in 103 patients and TP in 67. TP was preferred in cases previous mesh hernia repair or if extended lymph-node dissection (LND) was considered necessary. Otherwise, EP was performed; it was preferred in cases of obesity (body mass index (BMI) > 30kg/m2)) or previous intra-abdominal surgery. Results. There were no significant differences in preoperative mean age (64.4 vs 65.6 years), BMI (26.5 vs 26.3 kg/m2) or prostate size (51.8 vs 55.8 cm3) between EP and TP patients. Owing to preoperative selection criteria, prostate-specific antigen levels and the average Gleason score were significantly lower in EP than in TP patients (p < 0.001). Whereas access time and time for anastomosis did not differ significantly (21 vs 19 min, p = 0.11, and 26 vs 24 min, p = 0.36, respectively), overall surgical time was significantly longer in TP (225 vs 191 min, p < 0.001). Blood loss was equal in both groups (EP 276 vs TP 281 ml, p = 0.88). Complication rates were lower in EP (n = 7, 6.8% vs n = 8, 12%, p = 0.024). Time until first defecation and last analgesic treatment were significantly shorter in EP (p < 0.05). Conclusions. The results of the current evaluation underline the clinical advantages of an extraperitoneal approach for RARP. However, a transperitoneal approach is still considered necessary for extended LND or special clincial conditions. Robotic teams should be trained using both approaches.

Complications of a buried penis in an extremely obese patient

The buried penis syndrome in adults is a rare condition of different aetiologies. Today extreme obesity is considered as a major contributor. We present a case of a 30‐year‐old extremely obese patient (BMI 65 kg/m2) with purulent infection of the penile cavity, a phlegmon of the mons pubis and urinary retention due to a buried penis. Whereas acute complications of a buried penis in obese patients include local infection and urinary retention, chronic problems are undirected voiding, disturbed vaginal penetration and erectile dysfunction. Even though several surgical techniques are described, weight reduction should be primarily preferred.

Pre-prostatic tissue removed in robotic assisted lymph node dissection for prostate cancer contains lymph nodes.

Objective: The on-going discussion about extent and best template for pelvic lymph dissection (PLND) motivated us to analyse pre-prostatic tissue (PPT) for lymph nodes and metastases. Materials and Methods: From December 2010 to August 2011 PPT was sent for histopathological evaluation during 80 robotic assisted radical prostatectomies (RARP) and one extended staging lymph node dissection. All patients had either a limited (lPLND, n = 44) or an extended lymph node dissection (ePLND, n = 36). Clinical data were retrospectively analyzed and compared to histopathological findings. Results: Lymph nodes were found in PPT in 10/80 (12.5%) patients after RARP and in the one patient after staging ePLND. Mean number of lymph nodes detected in PPT of them was 1.2 (range 1-3). Clinically no differences were found between patients with or without lymph nodes in PPT. In the standard template of either ePLND or lPLND the average number of lymph nodes was 13 (range 2-56). Herein metastases were found in 10 (12.5%) patients after RARP and in the patient after staging ePLND. A metastasis in PPT was only found after staging ePLND. Conclusions: Pre-prostatic tissue might contain lymph nodes that potentially harbour metastases. In the intention to perform the most accurate staging this tissue should be considered for histopathological evaluation.

V2-03 ROBOT-ASSISTED REPAIR OF SUPRATRIGONAL VESICOVAGINAL FISTULAE USING A PERITONEAL FLAP INLAY

the same patient showed distinct expression profiles using genes included in available prognostic signatures (Figure 1). CONCLUSIONS: Our results challenge the claim that expression based prognostic tests are robust to multifocality. Additional molecular studies are needed to better characterize the biologically dominant lesion in multi-focal PCa and hold promise for the development of improved prognostic biomarkers.

V12-04 ROBOT ASSISTED ORTHOTOPIC MODIFIED STUDER NEOBLADDER

and median length of stay was 2 days (2-12). All cases were completed robotically. Intraoperative blood loss was negligible. Four patients experienced a Clavien grade II complication (urinary tract infection requiring antibiotics). At a median follow-up of 320 days (55-907) no recurrences occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic ureteral reimplantation for ureteroenteric strictures is a safe and highly effective procedure. Given the suboptimal success rate of endoscopic treatment, robotic repair has become a first treatment option in our centers.

Urethrale Anastomose bei orthotopem Blasenersatz nach roboterassistierter radikaler Zystektomie (RARC) an deutschsprachigen Robotikzentren

INTRODUCTION Following robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) and extracorporeal reconstruction, robotic continuous suture techniques and those using open or robotically pre-positioned single sutures are used for the urethroneovesical anastomosis. METHODS 62 German-speaking robotic centres were asked in an online questionnaire whether they carried out RARC. Following an affirmative answer further questions were put to the form of the neobladder and the technique of the urethrovesical anastomosis. RESULTS 80% of the online questionnaires were answered. 44% (n=22) of these centres perform the RARC. According to the answers, given all of the centres but one perform an extracorporeal construction of the neobladder [Studer bladder 73% (n=16), Hautmann bladder 18% (n=4), others 9% (n=2)]. After reconstruction 36% (n=8) of the teams perform a completely open surgical anastomosis with pre-positioned sutures, 24% (n=5) close the anastomosis in a single knot technique using robotically pre-positioned sutures and 40% (n=9) use continuous sutures during the intracorporeal reconstruction or after re-docking the robot. CONCLUSION According to this questionnaire to German-speaking centres the most common anastomotic technique following extracorporeal reconstruction, mostly a Studer bladder, is that of the pre-positioned single knot sutures. This offers the advantage that a re-docking of the robotic cart is unnecessary. In contrast, however, to robotically performed suturing, there must be enough space in the open procedure to surgically tie-off the sutures of the anastomosis.