ABSTRACT
Objectives: To highlight critical preoperative and intraoperative considerations in approaching fistula repair robotically. Methods: A search of the literature was conducted to identify relevant articles pertaining to robotic management of urinary fistulae. Results: Fistulae of the genitourinary tract can be a challenging dilemma for urologists, as definitive management may require surgical intervention. Pathogenesis of both enteric and non-enteric fistulae are multifactorial, and successful repair hinges on the meticulous perioperative evaluation, planning, and execution. Traditional open techniques can subject patients to increased morbidity and prolonged hospitalizations. Since its introduction, the robotic surgical platform has continued to expand its indications. Its three-dimensional visualization and tremor free wristed instrument movements have made the robotic platform an attractive option for genitourinary fistula reconstruction. Conclusion: Robotic management of complex urinary fistulae is feasible in expert hands; more studies are needed to define its role in the treatment algorithm of this devastating conditions.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This cross-sectional study assessed a generative-AI platform to automate the creation of accurate, appropriate, and compelling social-media (SoMe) posts from urological journal articles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred SoMe-posts from the top 3 journals in urology X (Twitter) profiles were collected from Aug-2022 to Oct-2023 A freeware GPT-tool was developed to auto-generate SoMe posts, which included title-summarization, key findings, pertinent emojis, hashtags, and DOI links to the article. Three physicians independently evaluated GPT-generated posts for achieving tetrafecta of accuracy and appropriateness criteria. Fifteen scenarios were created from 5 randomly selected posts from each journal. Each scenario contained both the original and the GPT-generated post for the same article. Five questions were formulated to investigate the posts' likability, shareability, engagement, understandability, and comprehensiveness. The paired posts were then randomized and presented to blinded academic authors and general public through Amazon Mechanical Turk (AMT) responders for preference evaluation. RESULTS: Median (IQR) time for post auto-generation was 10.2 seconds (8.5-12.5). Of the 150 rated GPT-generated posts, 115 (76.6%) met the correctness tetrafecta: 144 (96%) accurately summarized the title, 147 (98%) accurately presented the articles' main findings, 131 (87.3%) appropriately used emojis and hashtags 138 (92%). A total of 258 academic urologists and 493 AMT responders answered the surveys, wherein the GPT-generated posts consistently outperformed the original journals' posts for both academicians and AMT responders (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Generative-AI can automate the creation of SoMe posts from urology journal abstracts that are both accurate and preferable by the academic community and general public.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To report perioperative and long-term postoperative outcomes of cystectomy patients with ileal conduit (IC) urinary diversion undergoing parastomal hernia (PSH) repair. METHOD: We reviewed patients who underwent cystectomy and IC diversion between 2003 and 2022 in our center. Baseline variables, including surgical approach of PSH repair and repair technique, were captured. Multivariable Cox regressionanalysis was performed to test for the associations between different variables and PSH recurrence. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with a median (IQR) age of 79 (73-82) years were included. The median time between cystectomy and PSH repair was 30 (14-49) months. Most PSH repairs (32/36, 89%) were performed electively, while 4 were due to small bowel obstruction. Hernia repairs were performed through open (n=25), robotic (10), and laparoscopic approaches (1). Surgical techniques included direct repair with mesh (20), direct repair without mesh (4), stoma relocation with mesh (5), and stomarelocation without mesh (7). The 90-day complication rate was 28%. In a median follow-up of 24 (7-47) months, 17 patients (47%) had a recurrence. The median time to recurrence was 9 (7-24) months. On multivariable analysis, 90-day complication following PSH repair was associated with an increased risk of recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: In this report of one of the largest series of PSH repair in the Urology literature, 47% of patients had a recurrence following hernia repair with a median follow-up time of 2 years. There was no significant difference in recurrence rates when comparing repair technique or the use of open or minimally invasive approaches.
Subject(s)
Cystectomy , Herniorrhaphy , Incisional Hernia , Urinary Diversion , Humans , Urinary Diversion/methods , Aged , Male , Cystectomy/methods , Female , Herniorrhaphy/methods , Aged, 80 and over , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Incisional Hernia/surgery , Incisional Hernia/etiology , Incisional Hernia/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Hernia, Ventral/surgery , Recurrence , Surgical Mesh , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/surgery , Time FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Inguinal lymph node dissection plays an important role in the management of melanoma, penile and vulval cancer. Inguinal lymph node dissection is associated with various intraoperative and postoperative complications with significant heterogeneity in classification and reporting. This lack of standardization challenges efforts to study and report inguinal lymph node dissection outcomes. The aim of this study was to devise a system to standardize the classification and reporting of inguinal lymph node dissection perioperative complications by creating a worldwide collaborative, the complications and adverse events in lymphadenectomy of the inguinal area (CALI) group. METHODS: A modified 3-round Delphi consensus approach surveyed a worldwide group of experts in inguinal lymph node dissection for melanoma, penile and vulval cancer. The group of experts included general surgeons, urologists and oncologists (gynaecological and surgical). The survey assessed expert agreement on inguinal lymph node dissection perioperative complications. Panel interrater agreement and consistency were assessed as the overall percentage agreement and Cronbach's α. RESULTS: Forty-seven experienced consultants were enrolled: 26 (55.3%) urologists, 11 (23.4%) surgical oncologists, 6 (12.8%) general surgeons and 4 (8.5%) gynaecology oncologists. Based on their expertise, 31 (66%), 10 (21.3%) and 22 (46.8%) of the participants treat penile cancer, vulval cancer and melanoma using inguinal lymph node dissection respectively; 89.4% (42 of 47) agreed with the definitions and inclusion as part of the inguinal lymph node dissection intraoperative complication group, while 93.6% (44 of 47) agreed that postoperative complications should be subclassified into five macrocategories. Unanimous agreement (100%, 37 of 37) was achieved with the final standardized classification system for reporting inguinal lymph node dissection complications in melanoma, vulval cancer and penile cancer. CONCLUSION: The complications and adverse events in lymphadenectomy of the inguinal area classification system has been developed as a tool to standardize the assessment and reporting of complications during inguinal lymph node dissection for the treatment of melanoma, vulval and penile cancer.
Subject(s)
Consensus , Delphi Technique , Inguinal Canal , Lymph Node Excision , Melanoma , Penile Neoplasms , Postoperative Complications , Vulvar Neoplasms , Humans , Lymph Node Excision/adverse effects , Lymph Node Excision/methods , Female , Male , Penile Neoplasms/surgery , Penile Neoplasms/pathology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Vulvar Neoplasms/surgery , Vulvar Neoplasms/pathology , Melanoma/surgery , Melanoma/pathology , Inguinal Canal/surgery , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Annually, about 300 million surgeries lead to significant intraoperative adverse events (iAEs), impacting patients and surgeons. Their full extent is underestimated due to flawed assessment and reporting methods. Inconsistent adoption of new grading systems and a lack of standardization, along with litigation concerns, contribute to underreporting. Only half of relevant journals provide guidelines on reporting these events, with a lack of standards in surgical literature. To address these issues, the Intraoperative Complications Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standard (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration was established in 2022. The initiative involves conducting global surveys and a Delphi consensus to understand the barriers for poor reporting of iAEs, validate shared criteria for reporting, define iAEs according to surgical procedures, evaluate the existing grading systems' reliability, and identify strategies for enhancing the collection, reporting, and management of iAEs. Invitation to participate are extended to all the surgical specialties, interventional cardiology, interventional radiology, OR Staffs and anesthesiology. This effort represents an essential step towards improved patient safety and the well-being of healthcare professionals in the surgical field.
Subject(s)
Specialties, Surgical , Surgeons , Humans , Consensus , Reproducibility of Results , Intraoperative Complications/diagnosisABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We assessed the effect of prophylactic biologic mesh on parastomal hernia (PSH) development in patients undergoing cystectomy and ileal conduit (IC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase 3, randomized, controlled trial (NCT02439060) included 146 patients who underwent cystectomy and IC at the University of Southern California between 2015 and 2021. Follow-ups were physical exam and CT every 4 to 6 months up to 2 years. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive FlexHD prophylactic biological mesh using sublay intraperitoneal technique vs standard IC. The primary end point was time to radiological PSH, and secondary outcomes included clinical PSH with/without surgical intervention and mesh-related complications. RESULTS: The 2 arms were similar in terms of baseline clinical features. All surgeries and mesh placements were performed without any intraoperative complications. Median operative time was 31 minutes longer in patients who received mesh, yet with no statistically significant difference (363 vs 332 minutes, P = .16). With a median follow-up of 24 months, radiological and clinical PSHs were detected in 37 (18 mesh recipients vs 19 controls) and 16 (8 subjects in both arms) patients, with a median time to radiological and clinical PSH of 8.3 and 15.5 months, respectively. No definite mesh-related adverse events were reported. Five patients (3 in the mesh and 2 in the control arm) required surgical PSH repair. Radiological PSH-free survival rates in the mesh and control groups were 74% vs 75% at 1 year and 69% vs 62% at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of biologic mesh at the time of IC construction is safe without significant protective effects within 2 years following surgery.
Subject(s)
Cystectomy , Surgical Mesh , Urinary Diversion , Humans , Surgical Mesh/adverse effects , Male , Female , Urinary Diversion/methods , Aged , Middle Aged , Cystectomy/methods , Cystectomy/adverse effects , Incisional Hernia/prevention & control , Urinary Bladder Neoplasms/surgery , Follow-Up Studies , Postoperative Complications/prevention & control , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Prophylactic Surgical Procedures/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Vesicourethral anastomosis stenosis (VUAS) refers to the diameter narrowing of a vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA). It is a known complication after radical prostatectomy that nowadays presents in less than 1% of these cases. When the lumen narrows sufficiently to impede urine flow, obstructive symptoms arise. While the incidence of VUAS used to be notably higher prior to the widespread use of the robotic approach, traditional procedures still fail in up to 42% of cases. Initial management typically involves endoscopic procedures, such as dilation, incision, or resection. If these approaches prove ineffective, VUA reconstruction is warranted. Following the resection of the unhealthy urethra, a potential drawback is the insufficient length of the healthy proximal urethral to reach the bladder without tension. In such cases, urinary diversion with an ileal conduit is an option. However, when the patient prefers to maintain an orthotopic urinary tract configuration, there is limited guidance in the literature regarding surgical techniques. OBJECTIVE: To outline the indications, describe the step-by-step technique, and evaluate the outcomes of transperineal urethral advancement to facilitate a tension-free VUA. MATERIALS: We first discuss the indications to identify which patients are candidates for this procedure. Then, a step-by-step description of the robotic VUA revision assisted by transperineal urethral mobilization is presented. Detailed steps and helpful hints are included. Finally, we outline the postoperative pathway and expected outcomes. RESULTS: This technique allows patients with VUAS to preserve the orthotopic configuration of the urinary tract when a tension-free anastomosis proves challenging. Although urinary incontinence is expected, an artificial urinary sphincter could be placed in the following months. CONCLUSION: The robotic management of complex vesicourethral anastomosis stenosis with transperineal urethral advancement is a feasible and safe procedure that requires the interdisciplinary management of robotic and reconstructive urologists.
Subject(s)
Robotic Surgical Procedures , Urethra , Male , Humans , Urethra/surgery , Constriction, Pathologic/etiology , Constriction, Pathologic/surgery , Urogenital Surgical Procedures , Anastomosis, SurgicalABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Objective: To report outcomes from the largest multicenter series of penile cancer patients undergoing video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL). Materials and Methods: Retrospective multicenter analysis. Authors of 21 centers from the Penile Cancer Collaborative Coalition-Latin America (PeC-LA) were included. All centers performed the procedure following the same previously described standardized technique. Inclusion criteria included penile cancer patients with no palpable lymph nodes and intermediate/high-risk disease and those with non-fixed palpable lymph nodes less than 4 cm in diameter. Categorical variables are shown as percentages and frequencies whereas continuous variables as mean and range. Results: From 2006 to 2020, 210 VEIL procedures were performed in 105 patients. Mean age was 58 (45-68) years old. Mean operative time was 90 minutes (60-120). Mean lymph node yield was 10 nodes (6-16). Complication rate was 15.7%, including severe complications in 1.9% of procedures. Lymphatic and skin complications were noted in 8.6 and 4.8% of patients, respectively. Histopathological analysis revealed lymph node involvement in 26.7% of patients with non-palpable nodes. Inguinal recurrence was observed in 2.8% of patients. 10y- overall survival was 74.2% and 10-y cancer specific survival was 84.8%. CSS for pN0, pN1, pN2 and pN3 were 100%, 82.4%, 72.7% and 9.1%, respectively. Conclusion: VEIL seems to offer appropriate long term oncological control with minimal morbidity. In the absence of non-invasive stratification measures such as dynamic sentinel node biopsy, VEIL emerged as the alternative for the management of non-bulky lymph nodes in penile cancer.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To report outcomes from the largest multicenter series of penile cancer patients undergoing video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy (VEIL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective multicenter analysis. Authors of 21 centers from the Penile Cancer Collaborative Coalition-Latin America (PeC-LA) were included. All centers performed the procedure following the same previously described standardized technique. Inclusion criteria included penile cancer patients with no palpable lymph nodes and intermediate/high-risk disease and those with non-fixed palpable lymph nodes less than 4 cm in diameter. Categorical variables are shown as percentages and frequencies whereas continuous variables as mean and range. RESULTS: From 2006 to 2020, 210 VEIL procedures were performed in 105 patients. Mean age was 58 (45-68) years old. Mean operative time was 90 minutes (60-120). Mean lymph node yield was 10 nodes (6-16). Complication rate was 15.7%, including severe complications in 1.9% of procedures. Lymphatic and skin complications were noted in 8.6 and 4.8% of patients, respectively. Histopathological analysis revealed lymph node involvement in 26.7% of patients with non-palpable nodes. Inguinal recurrence was observed in 2.8% of patients. 10y- overall survival was 74.2% and 10-y cancer specific survival was 84.8%. CSS for pN0, pN1, pN2 and pN3 were 100%, 82.4%, 72.7% and 9.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: VEIL seems to offer appropriate long term oncological control with minimal morbidity. In the absence of non-invasive stratification measures such as dynamic sentinel node biopsy, VEIL emerged as the alternative for the management of non-bulky lymph nodes in penile cancer.
Subject(s)
Penile Neoplasms , Video-Assisted Surgery , Aged , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Inguinal Canal/surgery , Inguinal Canal/pathology , Lymph Node Excision/methods , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Penile Neoplasms/surgery , Penile Neoplasms/pathology , Treatment Outcome , Video-Assisted Surgery/methods , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Standards for reporting surgical adverse events (AEs) vary widely within the scientific literature. Failure to adequately capture AEs hinders efforts to measure the safety of healthcare delivery and improve the quality of care. The aim of the present study is to assess the prevalence and typology of perioperative AE reporting guidelines among surgery and anesthesiology journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In November 2021, three independent reviewers queried journal lists from the SCImago Journal & Country Rank (SJR) portal (www.scimagojr.com), a bibliometric indicator database for surgery and anesthesiology academic journals. Journal characteristics were summarized using SCImago, a bibliometric indicator database extracted from Scopus journal data. Quartile 1 (Q1) was considered the top quartile and Q4 bottom quartile based on the journal impact factor. Journal author guidelines were collected to determine whether AE reporting recommendations were included and, if so, the preferred reporting procedures. RESULTS: Of 1409 journals queried, 655 (46.5%) recommended surgical AE reporting. Journals most likely to recommend AE reporting were: by category surgery (59.1%), urology (53.3%), and anesthesia (52.3%); in top SJR quartiles (i.e. more influential); by region, based in Western Europe (49.8%), North America (49.3%), and the Middle East (48.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery and anesthesiology journals do not consistently require or provide recommendations on perioperative AE reporting. Journal guidelines regarding AE reporting should be standardized and are needed to improve the quality of surgical AE reporting with the ultimate goal of improving patient morbidity and mortality.
Subject(s)
Anesthesiology , Humans , Bibliometrics , Journal Impact Factor , Europe , Middle EastABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The accurate assessment and grading of adverse events (AE) is essential to ensure comparisons between surgical procedures and outcomes. The current lack of a standardized severity grading system may limit our understanding of the true morbidity attributed to AEs in surgery. The aim of this study is to review the prevalence in which intraoperative adverse event (iAE) severity grading systems are used in the literature, evaluate the strengths and limitations of these systems, and appraise their applicability in clinical studies. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were queried to yield all clinical studies reporting the proposal and/or the validation of iAE severity grading systems. Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched separately to identify the articles citing the systems to grade iAEs identified in the first search. RESULTS: Our search yielded 2957 studies, with 7 studies considered for the qualitative synthesis. Five studies considered only surgical/interventional iAEs, while 2 considered both surgical/interventional and anesthesiologic iAEs. Two included studies validated the iAE severity grading system prospectively. A total of 357 citations were retrieved, with an overall self/nonself-citation ratio of 0.17 (53/304). The majority of citing articles were clinical studies (44.1%). The average number of citations per year was 6.7 citations for each classification/severity system, with only 2.05 citations/year for clinical studies. Of the 158 clinical studies citing the severity grading systems, only 90 (56.9%) used them to grade the iAEs. The appraisal of applicability (mean%/median%) was below the 70% threshold in 3 domains: stakeholder involvement (46/47), clarity of presentation (65/67), and applicability (57/56). CONCLUSION: Seven severity grading systems for iAEs have been published in the last decade. Despite the importance of collecting and grading the iAEs, these systems are poorly adopted, with only a few studies per year using them. A uniform globally implemented severity grading system is needed to produce comparable data across studies and develop strategies to decrease iAEs, further improving patient safety.
Subject(s)
Bibliometrics , Intraoperative Complications , Humans , Intraoperative Complications/diagnosis , Intraoperative Complications/epidemiologyABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Purpose Hartmann's procedure is the resection of the rectosigmoid colon with an end colostomy formation and closure of the anorectal stump (1). Its reversal has a morbidity rate up to 58% (2, 3) with an incidence of fistulae formation of 4.08% (1). Herein, we present a robotic-assisted repair of a complex fistula that occurred as complication of Hartmann's reversal when the stapler was introduced inadvertently through the vaginal canal. Patient and methods Eighty-three-year-old female with past medical history of hysterectomy and ischemic colitis that required colectomy and colostomy placement in December 2020. In March 2022, the patient underwent a colostomy takedown, after which she reported fecaluria, urine leakage per vagina, and recurrent urinary tract infections. Cystoscopy and vaginoscopy revealed a large colovesical fistula, a staple in the bladder trigone, and several staples in the anterior vaginal wall. Robotically, extensive adhesiolysis was performed, the sigmoid was separated from the bladder, and the intact rectal stump was dissected free. The staple from the bladder trigone was removed. Bladder was closed in two layers with 3-0 V-Loc. Colorectal anastomosis was not feasible due to the short length of both ends. Therefore, a permanent colostomy was placed. Results Operative time was 454min., and estimated blood loss was 100cc. Discharged on postoperative day 4 with a JP drain and a 20Fr Foley catheter. Drain, and Foley were removed on postoperative days 9 and 23, respectively. No postoperative complications were reported. Conclusion Robotic-assisted repair represents an effective approach for the management of colovesical fistulae after Hartmann's reversal.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Simple prostatectomy has been established as a management option for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with glands larger than 80 cc.1 Robotic-assisted simple prostatectomy (RASP) has been established as a safe and effective management option. This has been reported in multiple studies comparing it with the open approach where no statistically significant differences in complication rates have been found.2 The intrafascial approach is intended to add multiple benefits, such as not requiring continuous bladder irrigation and resection of a larger percentage of the adenoma, potentially leading to a lower reoperation rate and diagnosis of prostate cancer in patients in which this was missed preoperatively.3 OBJECTIVE: To present the resection of a very large prostate can lead to significant intraoperative challenges. Therefore, we demosntrate our intrafascial robotic management of a 470g prostate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 56-year-old with LUTS (IPSS: 34) for over 6 years, complicated with multiple episodes of urinary retention. PSA: 20.6 ng/mL. MRI reported a 463 cc prostate volume without focal lesions. First, the retropubic space was developed. Cystotomy was performed at the anterior bladder neck. A plane between the prostatic capsule and the surrounding fascia was dissected while carefully preserving the neurovascular bundles. Due to its large size, the prostate was divided into segments to facilitate its extraction. Hemostatic control and vesicourethral anastomosis were performed. RESULTS: Discharged on postoperative day 1 with a Jackson-Pratt drain and Foley catheter removed on days 6 and 9, respectively. Pathology was negative for malignancy. Patient-reported improvement of LUTS (IPSS: 3) and preservation of erectile function (SHIM: 23) at the 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSION: The intrafascial technique can be useful in cases where a large-sized prostate hinders a transvesical approach. Additionally, it allows for an easier piecemeal of the gland. A larger series is needed to determine its potential benefits.
Subject(s)
Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms , Prostatic Hyperplasia , Robotic Surgical Procedures , Male , Humans , Middle Aged , Prostate/pathology , Robotic Surgical Procedures/methods , Prostatic Hyperplasia/complications , Prostatic Hyperplasia/surgery , Prostatic Hyperplasia/pathology , Urinary Bladder/pathology , Prostatectomy/methods , Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/surgery , Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms/complications , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Introduction: Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) occur and have the potential to impact the postoperative course. However, iAEs are underreported and are not routinely collected in the contemporary surgical literature. There is no widely utilized system for the collection of essential aspects of iAEs, and there is no established database for the standardization and dissemination of this data that likely have implications for outcomes and patient safety. The Intraoperative Complication Assessment and Reporting with Universal Standards (ICARUS) Global Surgical Collaboration initiated a global effort to address these shortcomings, and the establishment of an adverse event data collection system is an essential step. In this study, we present the core-set variables for collecting iAEs that were based on the globally validated ICARUS criteria for surgical/interventional and anesthesiologic intraoperative adverse event collection and reporting. Material and Methods: This article includes three tools to capture the essential aspects of iAEs. The core-set variables were developed from the globally validated ICARUS criteria for reporting iAEs (item 1). Next, the summary table was developed to guide researchers in summarizing the accumulated iAE data in item 1 (item 2). Finally, this article includes examples of the method and results sections to include in a manuscript reporting iAE data (item 3). Then, 5 scenarios demonstrating best practices for completing items 1-3 were presented both in prose and in a video produced by the ICARUS collaboration. Dissemination: This article provides the surgical community with the tools for collecting essential iAE data. The ICARUS collaboration has already published the 13 criteria for reporting surgical adverse events, but this article is unique and essential as it actually provides the tools for iAE collection. The study team plans to collect feedback for future directions of adverse event collection and reporting. Highlights: This article represents a novel, fully-encompassing system for the data collection of intraoperative adverse events.The presented core-set variables for reporting intraoperative adverse events are not based solely on our opinion, but rather are synthesized from the globally validated ICARUS criteria for reporting intraoperative adverse events.Together, the included text, figures, and ICARUS collaboration-produced video should equip any surgeon, anesthesiologist, or nurse with the tools to properly collect intraoperative adverse event data.Future directions include translation of this article to allow for the widest possible adoption of this important collection system.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To report our experience and outcomes using a novel robotic technique for the simultaneous repair of rectovesical fistula (RVF) with vesicourethral anastomotic stricture (VUAS) after radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: Between 2019 and 2021, four consecutive patients who underwent robotic-assisted simultaneous repair of RVF with concurrent VUAS after RP were retrospectively reviewed. Baseline characteristics and perioperative outcomes were examined and reported. Complications were graded using the modified Clavien-Dindo classification system and the European Association of Urology Complications Panel Assessment and Recommendations. RESULTS: Four cases with a median age of 68.5 (63.3-72.3) years were treated. Interposition omentum flaps were used in all our cases. One case had perineal urethral mobilization to reach healthy urethral margins and tension-free vesicourethral anastomosis. Surgeries were uneventful, with no intraoperative complications reported. Median operative time, estimated blood loss, and length of hospital stay were 370 (291.3-453) minutes, 255 (175-262.5) mL, and 2.5 (2-3) days, respectively. Median Jackson-Pratt drains, Double-J stents and Foley catheter removal days were 6 (6-10), 38 (32-43), and 30 (27-41) days, respectively. No postoperative complications were reported. The median follow-up time was 16.25 (12-26) months, and no fistula recurrence was shown. CONCLUSION: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic repair could represent an effective approach for the simultaneous repair of RVF with concomitant VUAS. More studies and management standardization are needed to assess the role of the robotic platform in the simultaneous repair of RVF with VUAS after radical prostatectomy.