Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy-impact of a mentorship program on oncological outcomes during the learning curve.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The learning curve for robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is estimated to be about 50-200 cases. This study will evaluate the benefit of a mentorship programme after completing a mini-fellowship in RARP by an experienced surgeon who previously trained in open and laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: Our study was a retrospective comparative analysis of RARP performed by a single consultant urologist. A retrospective chart review of the first 120 cases was performed. The 120 patients were divided into three groups of 40 cases. For the first 40 cases, an appropriately qualified mentor was present. The peri-operative and oncological outcomes were compared between the three groups. RESULTS: Operative times significantly decreased with experience (250 min vs 234 min vs 225 min, p < 0.05). Complication rates, estimated blood loss, and length of stay were similar between all groups. There was a higher rate of positive margins in the final group (20% vs 17.5% vs 32.5%, p < 0.5). There was a greater number of pT3 tumours in group 3 (42%, n = 17) compared to groups 1 and 2 (20%, n = 8, and 22.5%, n = 9) which may account for the higher rate of positive margins in this group. CONCLUSION: In the transition of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon to robotic surgery, we showed that there is a benefit of a mentorship programme after a mini-fellowship in reducing the impact of the learning curve on patient outcomes. Ongoing mentorship may be of benefit in cases where a high volume of tumour is suspected and should be avoided in the early part of the learning curve to maximise oncological outcomes.

Spermatic vein embolization as a treatment for symptomatic varicocele.

INTRODUCTION: Varicocele is a relatively common condition in men that causes pain in approximately 10% of cases. There have been few studies to date assessing the improvements in both pain and quality of life parameters associated with spermatic vein embolization (SVE) as a treatment for patients with symptomatic varicocele, so we aimed to assess this. METHODS: A review was carried out of consecutive SVE procedures performed at our institution from 2013-2019. Only patients with painful varicocele were included after other causes of testicular pain were excluded. The technique employed was a combination of distal coil embolization of the spermatic vein with 4-6 mm coils at the level of the inguinal canal, as well as sclerotherapy to prevent reflux of sclerosant. Furthermore, a prospective validated Pain Impact Questionnaire-6 (PIQ-6) was performed to assess for improvement in quality of life. A matched pair Student two-tailed t-test was used to compare mean scores pre- and post-treatment, with 95% confidence intervals presented as T scores and their associated p-values. RESULTS: Over six years, 62 SVE procedures were performed for symptomatic varicocele. Success rate was 95%, with a median followup of nine months. Two patients had a failed procedure on two occasions requiring subsequent surgical ligation. There was one clinically significant recurrence. All components of PIQ-6 score showed a statistically significant reduction post-SVE, most noticeably pain severity and impact on leisure activities. CONCLUSIONS: SVE is a safe, effective, and well-tolerated treatment for symptomatic varicocele, improving pain and quality of life.