No abstract

There are multiple treatment strategies for patients with localized prostate adenocarcinoma. In intermediate- and high-risk patients, external beam radiation therapy demonstrates effective long-term cancer control rates comparable to radical prostatectomy. In patients who opt for initial radiotherapy but have a local recurrence of their cancer, there is no unanimity on the optimal salvage approach. The lack of randomized trials comparing surgery to other local salvage therapy or observation makes it difficult to ascertain the ideal management. A narrative review of existing prospective and retrospective data related to salvage radical prostatectomy after radiation therapy was undertaken. Based on retrospective and prospective data, post-radiation salvage radical prostatectomy confers oncologic benefits, with overall survival ranging from 84 to 95% at 5 years and from 52 to 77% at 10 years. Functional morbidity after salvage prostatectomy remains high, with rates of post-surgical incontinence and erectile dysfunction ranging from 21 to 93% and 28 to 100%, respectively. Factors associated with poor outcomes after post-radiation salvage prostatectomy include preoperative PSA, the Gleason score, post-prostatectomy staging, and nodal involvement. Salvage radical prostatectomy represents an effective treatment option for patients with biochemical recurrence after radiotherapy, although careful patient selection is important to optimize oncologic and functional outcomes.

e16610 Background: Bowel preparation regimens (BRs) were historically standard before radical cystectomy (RC) with urinary diversion to decrease infection and anastomotic breakdown. However, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol (ERAS) no longer includes BRs. Recent data show that BRs may exacerbate frailty, worsen surgical outcomes, and prolong recovery. Importantly, however, previous studies did not stratify by diversion type. We performed a population-based analysis of preoperative oral antibiotic BRs (OABRs) with RC, alongside subgroup analyses to compare outcomes by diversion type. Methods: RCs performed from 2019-2020 were identified using the new NSQIP Cystectomy-Targeted PUF. Captured variables included OABR, diversion type, demographics, comorbidities, and perioperative outcomes. Univariate analysis with two tailed chi square and t tests was performed to compare baseline characteristics, 30-day mortality, and complications. Multivariable logistic regression with stepwise-backward-elimination (p > 0.25) adjusted for mechanical BRs, operative approach, comorbidities, functional status, demographics, ASA class, labs, and staging. Results: In total, 3,894 RCs were performed, of which 357 (9.2%) included OABR. There were no significant baseline differences between the OABR and the non-OABR cohorts. On univariate analysis, OABR patients had increased operative time, length of stay (LOS), minor complications, and bleeds. On subgroup analysis, ileal conduit patients experienced higher rates of the 4 aforementioned outcomes plus deep wound infections and NGT use. However, the continent diversion subgroup was not associated with increased operative time, LOS, or any complications. Continent diversion had significantly lower rates of sepsis and ureteral fistula formation. Upon multivariable adjustment, OABR was not associated with increased rates of any complications across any subgroup. OABR did confer significantly decreased odds of sepsis in continent diversion patients. Conclusions: Supporting ERAS recommendations, this study showed that pre-RC OABRs do not improve outcomes and increase LOS for ileal conduits. However, this study uniquely included continent diversions, such as neobladders and Indiana pouches. Importantly, in continent diversion patients, OABR did not increase LOS or complications while decreasing sepsis rates. These findings suggest possible utility of OABR before RC with continent diversion.