Improved Outcomes Utilizing a Valveless-Trocar System during Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP).

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the effect of valveless trocar system (VTS) on intra-operative parameters, peri-operative outcomes, and 30-day postoperative complications in patients undergoing robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. METHODS: A total of 200 consecutive patients undergoing Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon were prospectively evaluated using either the valveless trocar (n = 100) or standard trocars (n = 100). Patient demographics, intra-operative parameters, length of stay, presence or absence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, analog pain score at 0-6 hours, 6-12 hours, 12-18 hours, and >24 hours, and 30-day postoperative complications were analyzed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, intra-operative urine output, length of stay, or 30-day complication rates between the two groups. While the VTS group had higher Body Mass Index (BMI) (28.45 vs. 27.23; P = 0.049), the operative time was significantly shorter in the VTS group (146 minutes vs. 167 minutes; P < .005). The VTS group experienced fewer episodes of nausea (2% vs. 10%; P = 0.0172). The VTS group had less pain intensity compared to the control in the first 18 hours: 0-6 hours (1.9 vs. 2.5; P = 0.034), 6-12 hours (2.8 vs. 3.6; P = 0.044), and 12-18 hours (2.2 vs. 3.1; P = 0.049), respectively. CONCLUSION: The use of a valveless trocar system during robot-assisted robotic prostatectomy may shorten operative times, and reduce postoperative pain scores and nausea episodes without increasing the 30-day complication rate. Further prospective randomized trials should be performed to validate these findings.

Robot-Assisted Transversus Abdominis Plane Block: Description of the Technique and Comparative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Several randomized clinical trials have shown the efficacy of percutaneous transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block in decreasing pain after open and minimally invasive surgeries. We postulated that TAP block could be performed by a robot-assisted transperitoneal approach and provide postoperative pain control equivalent to local anesthetic port infiltration. OBJECTIVE: To compare different indicators of postoperative pain between robot-assisted TAP and local anesthetic port infiltration in patients who had undergone robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). METHODOLOGY: A retrospective comparison of 214 consecutive patients undergoing RARP over a 1-year period was conducted. Patient demographics, comorbidities, operative details, and outcomes, including time to ambulation, pain score, narcotic usage, and length of stay, were compared. RESULTS: In total, 206 patients were included: 101 received local anesthetic port infiltration and 105 robot-assisted TAP block. There were no differences in estimated blood loss, operative time, time to ambulation, and length of stay between the two groups. The robot-assisted TAP block cohort experienced lesser pain than the local anesthetic port infiltration cohort in the intervals of 6 to 12 hours (2.05 vs 3.21, p = 0.0016) and 12 to 18 hours (2.19 vs 2.97, p = 0.0495) postoperation. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted TAP block is a safe alternative to local anesthetic port-site infiltration. Robot-assisted TAP is associated with lower postoperative pain scores and less narcotic use than local anesthetic port-site infiltration.

Selective Arterial Clamping Versus Hilar Clamping for Minimally Invasive Partial Nephrectomy.

Partial nephrectomy has become an accepted treatment of cT1 renal masses as it provides improved long-term renal function compared to radical nephrectomy (Campbell et al. J Urol. 182:1271-9, 2009). Hilar clamping is utilized to help reduce bleeding and improve visibility during tumor resection. However, concern over risk of kidney injury with hilar clamping has led to new techniques to reduce length of warm ischemia time (WIT) during partial nephrectomy. These techniques have progressed over the years starting with early hilar unclamping, controlled hypotension during tumor resection, selective arterial clamping, minimal margin techniques, and off-clamp procedures. Selective arterial clamping has progressed significantly over the years. The main question is what are the exact short- and long-term renal effects from increasing clamp time. Moreover, does it make sense to perform these more time-consuming or more complex procedures if there is no long-term preservation of kidney function? More recent studies have shown no difference in renal function 6 months from surgery when selective arterial clamping or even hilar clamping is employed, although there is short-term improved decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) with selective clamping and off-clamp techniques (Komninos et al. BJU Int. 115:921-8, 2015; Shah et al. 117:293-9, 2015; Kallingal et al. BJU Int. doi: 10.1111/bju.13192, 2015). This paper reviews the progression of total hilar clamping to selective arterial clamping (SAC) and the possible difference its use makes on long-term renal function. SAC may be attempted based on surgeon's decision-making, but may be best used for more complex, larger, more central or hilar tumors and in patients who have renal insufficiency at baseline or a solitary kidney.

A synopsis of drugs currently in preclinical and early clinical development for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia.

INTRODUCTION: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common disease among men and significantly impacts quality of life by causing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Current medical therapies are not always adequate in controlling LUTS or slowing disease progression, and there is unmet need for new effective therapeutic options. AREAS COVERED: The authors review the standard current medical therapies for BPH which include the use of α-1 blockers, 5-α reductase inhibitors, combination therapy and PDE inhibitors. Following this, the authors then discuss new therapies that are currently undergoing preclinical and clinical investigation. EXPERT OPINION: Existing preclinical and clinical trials have highlighted many promising therapies to treat BPH. Further investigation with larger clinical trials is needed to establish these drugs as standard therapies. As the number of drugs in the arsenal against BPH continues to grow, providers and patients will have to engage in a discussion that weighs the risks and benefits of each therapy.