Rationale for Robotic-assisted Simple Prostatectomy for Benign Prostatic Obstruction

Meyer, Dielle; Weprin, Samuel; Zukovski, Eduardo B; Porpiglia, Francesco; Hampton, Lance J.; Autorino, Riccardo

doi:10.1016/j.euf.2018.07.007

Cited by 16 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A systematic review by Kordan et al also revealed a shorter average operative time for OSP (79 to 93 minutes) depending on the surgical series [15]. This is probably because the ACS NSQIP database reflects realworld outcomes of different levels of surgical expertise [23,25]. No information is available on catheterization time, but if we assume that the LOS is a surrogate for catheterization time, AEEP should have a shorter catheterization time [12,13,25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perioperative Outcomes of Anatomic Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate, Robotic and Open Simple Prostatectomy From a Multi-Institutional Database

Labban¹,

Heidar²,

Misraï³

et al. 2021

Société Internationale D’Urologie Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare the perioperative morbidity of robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP), anatomical endoscopic enucleation of the prostate (AEEP) and open simple prostatectomy (OSP) for the treatment of benign prostatic obstruction (BPO). Methods: The national surgical quality improvement program database was queried for AEEP, RASP, and OSPprocedures. Clavien-Dindo-graded complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), and operative time were compared among the procedures. To control for the potentially confounding variables, we first conducted a multivariate backward conditional logistic regression, and then resorted to propensity score matching. Results: We identified 2867 AEEP, 234 RASP, and 1492 OSP procedures. After matching, the risk of pulmonary, renal, infectious, and thromboembolic adverse events was lower after AEEP but not RASP in comparison with OSP (P < 0.05). In comparison with RASP, AEEP had lower cardiac and thromboembolic events (P < 0.05). When compared with OSP, AEEP had reduced odds of Clavien-Dindo grade I (OR = 0.12; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.16) and II (OR = 0.38; 95% CI 0.24 to 9.58) complications. Also, AEEP had lower odds for grade I and II as well as grade IV complications (OR = 0.30; 95% CI 0.19 to 0.48, and OR = 0.05; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.24, respectively) compared with RASP. Conclusion: AEEP and RASP were associated with fewer perioperative adverse events, a shorter LOS and a reduced risk of transfusion compared with OSP. AEEP was associated with overall lower complication rates than RASP and OSP.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Perioperative Outcomes of Anatomic Endoscopic Enucleation of the Prostate, Robotic and Open Simple Prostatectomy From a Multi-Institutional Database

Labban¹,

Heidar²,

Misraï³

et al. 2021

Société Internationale D’Urologie Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, RASP provides three-dimensional vision, five degrees of movement, faster learning curve, especially regarding suture techniques, and comfortable operating position overcoming disadvantages of LSP. An increasing body of evidence confirms that RASP offers comparable outcomes to open and laser enucleation techniques for improvement in outcomes at a favorable low complication rate and costs [4]. Besides, RASP, compared with OSP, provides decreased length of hospital stay, blood loss, and transfusion prevalence [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The recent data on laser technologies such as holmium laser enucleation prostate (HoLEP) and thulium laser vapoenucleation prostate (ThuVEP) established these techniques as alternative approaches to OSP [4]. This has been adopted in two major guidelines recommendations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…EAU guidelines also indicate the need of randomized controlled studies for further recommendation. An increasing body of evidence supports the role of HoLEP and ThuVEP in the treatment of BPH with large prostate >80 gr given they are "size independent" treatment approaches with favorable long-term outcomes [4,7]. However, some of these treatment options also enharbour several limitations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review

Kordan

Canda

Köseoğlu

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary minimally invasive surgical (MIS) treatment options of patients with male Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms (LUTS) in men with prostate glands >80 mL include Holmium Laser Enucleation Prostate (HoLEP), Thulium laser VapoEnucleation Prostate (ThuVEP), and Laparoscopic (LSP) or Robotic-Assisted Simple Prostatectomy (RASP). Implementing new laser technologies is costly, and the steep learning curve of these laser techniques limit their wide range use. This promoted the use of LSP and RASP in centers with readily established laparoscopy or robotic surgery programs. The aim of this study is to review case and comparative series of RASP. We systematically reviewed published data from 2008 to 2020 on RASP and have identified 26 non-comparative and 9 comparative case series. RASP has longer operation time but less time spent in hospital and less blood loss. The outcomes of improvements in symptom score, post-voiding residual urine (PVR), postoperative PSA decline, complications, and cost are similar when compared to open and laser enucleation techniques. These outcomes position RASP as a viable MIS treatment option for patients with male LUTS needing surgical treatment for enlarged prostates. Nevertheless, prospective, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with multicenter and large sample size are needed to confirm the findings of this systematic review.

show abstract

“…Moreover, robotic surgery has "revived" the perineal approach for radical prostatectomy [16], and Kaouk and collaborators present an overview on the recent advances based on their experience with robotic perineal prostatectomy [17]. As robotic surgery is being implemented for the surgical treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia [18], Hemal et al describe a novel radical prostatectomy for patients with low risk cancer and enlarged prostate gland [19].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%