Faster both in operative time and functional recovery by the extraperitoneal daVinci SP-based robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity score matching analysis compared to transperitoneal multiport counterpart.

We aim to investigate the peri-operative outcomes after extraperitoneal single-port based robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (eSP-RARP) utilizing the da Vinci SP system compared to conventional transperitoneal multi-port counterparts (tMP-RARP), in an era when pelvic lymph node dissection (PNLD) was omitted for the node-negative case. With exclusion criteria of volume + 50 g, suspicious rectal invasion, and node-positive disease given relatively weak grasping power and limited range of motion from the current SP system, 50 consecutive patients (Since December 2021) with localized prostate cancer underwent eSP-RARP by a single urologist maintaining identical surgical technique for 100 consecutive tMP-RARP cases (Since December 2020). Given initial selection criteria, each group was matched to a 1:1 ratio based on the risk-stratification parameters and the prostate volume. The operative time, which was maintained in each group during the study period, was significantly faster in eSP-RARP groups than in tMP-RARP (149.2 vs. 163.2 min, p = 0.025), while the weight of the removed specimen (27.1 vs. 29.0 g, p = 0.420) and margin positivity (14.7% vs. 11.7% in pT2, p = 0.812) were similar. The gas-out (1.5 vs. 1.88 days, p = 0.003) and solid diet dates (2.26 vs. 3.22 days, p < 0.001) were faster in the eSP-RARP group. The single-pad continence dates (30.5 vs. 51.9 days, p = 0.145) and zero-pad continence dates (105.5 vs. 146.2 days, p = 0.210) were identical. 90-day single-pad continence rate was 92% vs. 82% (p = 0.142, 52% vs. 56% in zero-pad continence). Based on these, daVinci SP-based RARP restored bowel function faster with shorter operative time through an extraperitoneal approach than the conventional transperitoneal multi-port counterpart while maintaining similar incontinence outcomes in cases without a routine PNLD.

Comparison of three different endoscopic approaches in the treatment of bladder calculi.

Background: This study compared the following three endoscopic techniques used to treat bladder stones: transurethral cystoscope used with a pneumatic lithoclast or nephroscope used with a pneumatic lithoclast and nephroscope used with an ultrasonic lithoclast. Methods: Between January 2013 and May 2016, 107 patients with bladder stones underwent endoscopic treatment. Patients were classified into three groups based on the endoscopic techniques and energy modalities used in each group as: group 1 (transurethral stone removal using a cystoscope with pneumatic lithoclast), group 2 (transurethral stone removal using a nephroscope with pneumatic lithoclast), and group 3 (transurethral stone removal using a nephroscope with ultrasonic lithoclast). Baseline and perioperative data were retrospectively compared between three groups. Results: No statistically significant intergroup differences were observed in age, sex ratio, and stone size. A statistically significant intergroup difference was observed in the operation time-group 1, 71.3±46.6 min; group 2, 33.0±13.7 min; and group 3, 24.6±8.0 min. All patients showed complete stone clearance. The number of urethral entries was higher in group 1 than in the other groups. Significant complications did not occur in any patient. Conclusion: Nephroscopy scores over cystoscopy for the removal of bladder stones with respect to operation time. Ultrasonic lithoclast is a safe and efficacious modality that scores over a pneumatic lithoclast with respect to the operation time.