Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with previous renal transplantation.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in patients with previous renal transplantation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients who had undergone RARP for localized prostate cancer between 2005 and 2008 at a single institution (N=228). Of these, three patients were renal transplant recipients. A four-arm robotic configuration was used in all patients. Port placement was modified in two of the three renal transplant recipients to avoid trauma to the renal allograft. Preoperative demographics, perioperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were reviewed. RESULTS: RARP was completed successfully in all three renal transplant recipients. As expected, the American Society of Anesthesiologists score (3.3 vs 2.4) and Charlson weighted index of comorbidity (4.7 vs 2.4) were greater in previous transplant patients. There were no major differences in mean age, Gleason score, body mass index, estimated blood loss, operative time, complications, or oncologic outcomes between the two groups. Each of the patients with renal allografts had an undetectable prostate-specific antigen level and was continent (needing no pads) at 13 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: RARP is feasible in patients with a previous renal transplant. Although technically more challenging, RARP can be performed in previous transplant patients with acceptable morbidity and oncologic outcomes similar to those of other prostate cancer patients.

Patients with end-stage renal disease are candidates for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have multiple comorbidities that place them at increased risk for surgical complications. Consequently, patients with both ESRD and prostate cancer (PCa) have rarely been considered candidates for radical prostatectomy. The objective of this study is to compare ESRD patients who are undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) with a cohort of patients with no history of dialysis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 430 patients who were undergoing RALP, including 12 receiving dialysis at the time of surgery. Preoperative demographics, perioperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were compared using a two-tailed Student t test and a chi-square test, with significance at P<0.05. RESULTS: Patient demographics including body mass index, Gleason score, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) value were similar between the two groups. Patients with ESRD had younger age (55.5 vs 62.9 years; P<0.01), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists scores (3.7 vs 2.5; P<0.01), and higher age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index scores (6.2 vs 4.2; P<0.01). Patient outcomes including operative time, estimated blood loss, complication rate, postoperative stay, and positive margins did not differ significantly between groups. No ESRD patients needed pads or had a detectable PSA level using an ultrasensitive assay. CONCLUSIONS: This series represents the largest series of patients with ESRD undergoing RALP. These patients experienced similar outcomes compared with patients with no history of dialysis despite greater preoperative comorbidity. RALP produces minimal fluid shifts, low blood loss, and excellent cancer control, making it an ideal treatment option to prepare patients with both ESRD and PCa for renal transplantation.

Open prostatolithotomy for the management of giant prostatic calculi.

Giant prostatic calculi are very rare. We present the case of a 45-year-old man with multiple prostatic urethral calculi that replaced the entire gland. He underwent an open "prostatolithotomy," a novel method of stone removal akin to a simple retropubic prostatectomy. Eight stones weighing a total of 59 g were removed from the prostate. For certain patients, adjunctive vesical neck revision and deliberate drainage of the prostatic fossa may be beneficial in addition to stone extraction.

Urothelial carcinoma after external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: We reviewed the clinical course of patients in whom urothelial carcinoma developed following radiation therapy for prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of all patients between 1990 and 2005 with the diagnosis of bladder and prostate cancer was performed. Of 125 total patients new onset urothelial carcinoma developed in 11 after undergoing external beam radiation therapy for prostate cancer. RESULTS: Whole pelvis external beam radiation therapy with a proton boost to the prostate was the radiation modality in 7 of the 11 patients (64%), while the remaining 4 patients received standard external beam radiation only. Urothelial carcinoma was detected a mean of 3.07 years after completion of radiation therapy in the proton group, compared to a mean latency period of 5.75 years in the standard radiation group (p = 0.09). Average patient age at diagnosis was 72 years (range 64 to 84). All patients presented with gross hematuria and had cystoscopic findings of coexisting radiation cystitis. Of the 11 patients 5 (45%) presented with grade 3 carcinoma and eventually 7 (64%) required radical cystectomy. Urothelial tumors with sarcomatoid features (carcinosarcoma and spindle cell sarcomatoid) developed in 2 patients (18%). Of the 11 patients 10 (91%) were nonsmokers at the time of urothelial carcinoma diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Urothelial carcinoma in patients with previous radiation therapy for prostate cancer is often high grade, and the majority of patients have cancer progression requiring cystectomy. A high incidence of urothelial carcinoma with sarcomatoid features was seen in these patients.