ABSTRACT
Background@#This study aimed to present the surgical facilitation of neurovascular bundle (NVB) sparing using the toggling technique (30° lens down/up switching) and to evaluate erectile dysfunction (ED) recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). @*Methods@#We assessed 144 patients (group with toggling, n = 72; group without toggling, n = 72) who underwent RARP with bilateral NVB sparing using propensity score matching.Inclusion criteria were ≥ 1 year follow-up and preoperative potency as per the Sexual Health Inventory for Men (SHIM) questionnaire (≥ 17 points). Recovery of ED after RARP was defined as return to baseline sexual function or self-assessment regarding successful intercourse. The subjective surgeon’s nerve sparing (SNS) score and tunneling success rates were used to evaluate surgical facilitation. The recovery rate of ED between the groups was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier analysis. @*Results@#A better ED recovery trend was confirmed according to the SNS score (R 2 = 0.142, P = 0.004). In the analysis of NVB sparing ease, the toggling group showed higher SNS scores (on right/left side: P = 0.011 and < 0.001, respectively) and overall tunneling success rates (87% vs. 74%, P = 0.001) than the group without toggling. Overall, ED recovery rates were 82% (59/72) and 75% (54/72) in the groups with and without toggling, respectively, at the 1-year follow-up (P = 0.047), and the toggling group showed a faster ED recovery rate at 3 months (47% vs. 35%, P = 0.013). In a specific analysis of the potent cohort (< 60 years, bilateral full NVB spared, SHIM score ≥ 22), the ED recovery rate reached 87% (14/16) in the toggling group. @*Conclusion@#The retrograde early release with the toggling technique improves the facilitation of NVB sparing, leading to improved ED recovery.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To determine whether the biopsy core number and time interval between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy affect the operative and oncologic outcome of robot assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2008 to April 2009, a single surgeon performed 72 RALPs after an initial learning period of 30 cases. The relationship between time from biopsy to prostatectomy and biopsy core number with operative time and estimated blood loss (EBL) were initially evaluated with a linear regression model. These patients were classified into groups according to whether the interval from biopsy to RALP was within four weeks or not, and whether there were less than or greater than 10 core specimens removed. RESULTS: RALP was performed in 34 patients within four weeks of biopsy, and in 38 patients more than 4 weeks after biopsy. According to the number of core specimens removed, less than 10 cores were performed in 10 patients, and more than 10 cores were performed in 62 patients. Using an interval of 4 weeks as the cutoff point, early surgery was associated with longer operating time (232.6 vs 208.8 min) and increased estimated blood loss (305.1 vs 276.9 mL). For cases with more than 10 biopsy cores, there was a slight increase in operative time (229.2 vs 210.3 min). None of these differences were statistically significant by multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: Our data suggests that there is no reason to delay RALP to more than 4 weeks after prostate biopsy. It also revealed that the number of biopsy cores (up to 14) did not influence operative outcome. Thus, RALP is a feasible procedure regardless of the biopsy related prostate state.
Subject(s)
Humans , Biopsy , Learning , Linear Models , Multivariate Analysis , Operative Time , Prostate , Prostatectomy , RoboticsABSTRACT
To estimate the short-term results of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALRP) during the learning curve, in terms of surgical, oncological and functional outcomes, we conducted a prospective survey on RALRP. From July 2007, a single surgeon performed 63 robotic prostatectomies using the same operative technique. Perioperative data, including pathological and early functional results of the patient, were collected prospectively and analyzed. Along with the accumulation of the cases, the total operative time, setup time, console time and blood loss were significantly decreased. No major complication was present in any patient. Transfusion was needed in six patients; all of them were within the initial 15 cases. The positive surgical margin rate was 9.8% (5/51) in pT2 disease. The most frequent location of positive margin in this stage was the lateral aspect (60%), but in pT3 disease multiple margins were the most frequent (41.7%). Overall, 53 (84.1%) patients had totally continent status and the median time to continence was 6.56 weeks. Among 17 patients who maintained preoperative sexual activity (Sexual Health Inventory for Men > or = 17), stage below pT2, followed up for > 6 months with minimally one side of neurovascular bundle preservation procedure, 12 (70.6%) were capable of intercourse postoperatively, and the mean time for sexual intercourse after operation was 5.7 months. In this series, robotic prostatectomy was a feasible and reproducible technique, with a short learning curve and low perioperative complication rate. Even during the initial phase of the learning curve, satisfactory results were obtained with regard to functional and oncological outcome.