Purpose of ReviewBladder neck preservation (BNP) during radical prostatectomy (RP) has been proposed as a method to improve early recovery of urinary continence after radical prostatectomy. However, there is concern over a possible increase in the risk of positive surgical margins and prostate cancer recurrence rate. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis reported improved early recovery and overall long-term urinary continence without compromising oncologic control. The aim of our study was to perform a critical review of the literature to assess the impact on bladder neck and base margins after bladder neck sparing radical prostatectomy.Evidence AcquisitionWe carried out a systematic review of the literature using Pubmed, Scopus and Cochrane library databases in May 2017 using medical subject headings and free-text protocol according to PRISMA guidelines. We used the following search terms: bladder neck preservation, prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy and surgical margins. Studies focusing on positive surgical margins (PSM) in bladder neck sparing RP pertinent to the objective of this review were included.Evidence SynthesisOverall, we found 15 relevant studies reporting overall and site-specific positive surgical margins rate after bladder neck sparing radical prostatectomy. This included two RCTs, seven prospective comparative studies, two retrospective comparative studies and four case series. All studies were published between 1993 and 2015 with sample sizes ranging between 50 and 1067. Surgical approaches included open, laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. The overall and base-specific PSM rates ranged between 7–36% and 0–16.3%, respectively. Mean base PSM was 4.9% in those patients where bladder neck sparing was performed, but only 1.85% in those without sparing.SummaryBladder neck preservation during radical prostatectomy may increase base-positive margins. Further studies are needed to better investigate the impact of this technique on oncological outcomes. A future paradigm could include modification of intended approach to bladder neck dissection when anterior base lesions are identified on pre-operative MRI.

BackgroundEven though evidence based medicine, guidelines and algorithms still represent the pillars of the management of chronic diseases (i.e: hypertension, diabetes mellitus), a patient centred approach has been recently proposed as a successful strategy, in particular to improve drug adherence. Aim of the present review is to evaluate the unmet needs in LUTS/BPH management and the possible impact of a patient centered approach in this setting.MethodsA National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) PubMed search for relevant articles published from January 2000 until December 2016 was performed by combining the following MESH terms: patients centred medicine, patient centered care, person centered care, patient centered outcomes, value based care, shared decision making, male, Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms, Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia, treatment. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). All studies reporting on patient centred approach, shared decision making and evidence-based medicine were included in the review. All original article, reviews, letters, congress abstracts, and editorials comments were included in the review. Studies reporting single case reports, experimental studies on animal models and studies not in English were not included in the review.ResultsOverall 751 abstracts were reviewed, out of them 87 full texts were analysed resulting in 36 papers included. The evidence summarised in this systematic review confirmed how a patient centred visit may improve patient’s adherence to medication. Although a patient centred model has been rarely used in urology, management of Low Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) and Benign Prostatic Obstruction (BPO) may represent the perfect ground to experiment and improve this approach. Notwithstanding all the innovations in LUTS/BPO medical treatment, the real life picture is far from ideal.ConclusionsRecent evidence shows a dramatical low drug adherence and satisfaction to medical treatment in LUTS/BPH patients. A patient centred approach may improve drug adherence and some unmet needs in this area, potentially reducing complications and costs. However further well designed studies are needed to confirm this data.