Search

Background: Post-prostatectomy urinary incontinence is an adverse event leading to significant distress. Our aim was to evaluate immediate urinary continence (UC) recovery in a single-surgeon prospective randomized comparative study between the traditional robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (TR-RALP) and the Retzius-sparing RALP (RS-RALP), for the treatment of the clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa).Methods: 102 consecutive PCa patients were prospectively randomized to TR-RALP (57) or RS-RALP (45). Postoperative continence was defined as patient-reported absence of leakage or use of 0 pads/day. The immediate continence rate and 95% confidence interval (CI 95%) were calculated for each treatment. Univariable and multivariate logistic regressions were used to assess predictors of immediate continence following RALP. Continence rates from 1 to 6 months were calculated by Kaplan-Meier curves; log-rank test was used for the curve comparison. Two analyses were performed, considering a per-protocol (PP) population regarding all randomized patients that received nerve-sparing RALP and an Intention-To-Treat (ITT) population regarding all randomized patients that received RALP.Results: In the PP analysis, the rates of immediate continence were 12/40 (30%) (CI 95% 17-47%) for the TR-RALP and 20/39 (51.3%) (CI 95% 35-68%) for the RS-RALP (p = 0.05). In the ITT analysis, the corresponding rates were 12/57 (21%) (CI 95% 11-34%) for the TR-RALP and 23/45 (51%) (CI 95% 36-66%) for the RS-RALP (p = 0.001). Median time to continence was 21 days for the TR-RALP and 1 day for RS-RALP, respectively (p = 0.02). The relative Kaplan-Meier curves regarding continence resulted statistically different when compared with the log rank test (p = 0.02). In the multivariate analysis, lower age and the Retzius-sparing approach were significantly associated to earlier continence recovery.Conclusions: The Retzius-sparing approach significantly reduces time to continence following RALP. Further studies are required to confirm the reproducibility of our results and investigate the role of the RS-RALP as an additional "protective" factor for postoperative continence in the elderly population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Airseal represents a new generation of valveless and barrier-free surgical trocars that enable a stable pneumoperitoneum with continuous smoke evacuation and carbon dioxide (CO2) recirculation during surgery. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the potential advantages of the Airseal compared to a standard CO2 insufflator in the field of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN).Methods: Between October 2012 and April 2015, two cohorts of 122 consecutive patients with clinically localized renal cell carcinoma underwent RPN by a single surgeon, with the use of a standard CO2 pressure insufflator (Group A, 55 patients) or Airseal (Group B, 67 patients) and were prospectively compared.Results: The two groups were similar in baseline, preoperative characteristics. The mean dimension of the lesion, as evaluated by contrast-enhanced CT scan, was 30 (median 28; IQR 2) and 39 mm (median 40; IQR 2) for Groups A and B, respectively (p < 0.05). The complexity of the treated tumors was similar, as indicated by the mean RENAL nephrometry score. Positive surgical margins rate was similar in both groups (3.6 vs 4.5 %, p = 0.8) as well as the need for postoperative blood transfusion (9.1 vs 4.5 %, p = 0.3) and the development of postoperative acute kidney injury (16.4 vs 10.4 %, p = 0.3). Mean operative time and warm ischemia time were significantly shorter in Group B. Moreover, a significant increase in the cases performed as "zero ischemia" was observed in Group B (7.3 vs 30 %, p < 0.01).Conclusions: This is the first study comparing the Airseal with a standard CO2 insufflator system in the field of the RPN. The preliminary outcomes in terms of overall operative time, warm ischemia time and cases performed as "zero ischemia" are better with respect to standard insufflators. The feasibility, safety and efficacy of combining laser tumor enucleation with the valve-free insufflation systems should be evaluated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]