Submitted:
02 May 2023
Posted:
04 May 2023
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Methods
2.1. Surgical procedure and Setting:
2.2. Participants and Methods
2.3. Ethics Statement
3. Results
3.1. Baseline Parameters
3.2. Intraoperative data
3.3. Complications and Readmissions
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Ethics approval/Ethics Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Abbreviations
| ADT: | Androgen deprivation Therapy |
| ASA: | American association of anesthesiology comorbidity score |
| AUR: | Acute urinary retention |
| BMI: | Body mass index |
| CD: | Clavien-Dindo classification of postoperative complication |
| HBG: | Hemoglobin |
| IIEF: | International index of erectile function |
| IPSS: | International prostate symptom score |
| NHT: | neoadjuvant hormonal therapy |
| NSTEMI: | Non ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction |
| POD: | Post-operative day |
| PSA: | Prostate-specific antigen |
| PSM: | positive surgical margins |
| TUR-P: | Transurethral resection of the prostate |
| RARP: | Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy |
| RPE: | Retropubic radical prostatectomy |
| SPC: | Suprapubic catheter |
| TUC: | Transurethral catheter |
| OR-time: | Operating time |
| LOS: | Length of hospital stay |
| UTI: | Urinary tract infection |
| VTE: | Venous thromboembolism |
| UUTO: | Upper urinary tract obstruction |
| VUA: | Vesicourethral anastomosis |
| VUAL: | Vesicourethral anastomosis leakage |
References
- Secin, F.P.; Jiborn, T.; Bjartell, A.S.; Fournier, G.; Salomon, L.; Abbou, C.C.; Haber, G.P.; Gill, I.S.; Crocitto, L.E.; Nelson, R.A.; et al. Multi-institutional Study of Symptomatic Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism in Prostate Cancer Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic or Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 2008, 53, 134–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Abel, E.J.; Wong, K.; Sado, M.; Leverson, G.E.; Patel, S.R.; Downs, T.M.; Jarrard, D.F. Surgical Operative Time Increases the Risk of Deep Venous Thrombosis and Pulmonary Embolism in Robotic Prostatectomy. JSLS : J. Soc. Laparosc. Robot. Surg. 2014, 18, 282–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Goßler, C.; May, M.; Breyer, J.; Stojanoski, G.; Weikert, S.; Lenart, S.; Ponholzer, A.; Dreissig, C.; Burger, M.; Gilfrich, C.; et al. High BMI, Aggressive Tumours and Long Console Time Are Independent Predictive Factors for Symptomatic Lymphocele Formation after Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection. Urol. Int. 2021, 105, 453–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cao, L.; Yang, Z.; Qi, L.; Chen, M. Robot-assisted and laparoscopic vs open radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer: perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes. Medicine 2019, 98, e15770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ficarra, V.; Novara, G.; Artibani, W.; Cestari, A.; Galfano, A.; Graefen, M.; Guazzoni, G.; Guillonneau, B.; Menon, M.; Montorsi, F.; et al. Retropubic, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Cumulative Analysis of Comparative Studies. Eur. Urol. 2009, 55, 1037–1063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Good, D.W.; Stewart, G.D.; Laird, A.; Stolzenburg, J.-U.; Cahill, D.; McNeill, S.A. A Critical Analysis of the Learning Curve and Postlearning Curve Outcomes of Two Experience- and Volume-Matched Surgeons for Laparoscopic and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy. J. Endourol. 2015, 29, 939–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alenizi, A.M.; Valdivieso, R.; Rajih, E.; Meskawi, M.; Toarta, C.; Bienz, M.; Azizi, M.; Hueber, P.A.; Lavigueur-Blouin, H.; Trudeau, V.; et al. Factors predicting prolonged operative time for individual surgical steps of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): A single surgeon’s experience. Can. Urol. Assoc. J. 2015, 9, 417–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uchida, T.; Higure, T.; Kawakami, M.; Nakano, M.; Nakajima, N.; Kim, H.; et al. What factors affect the operative time of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy? Surg Endosc. 2021, 35, 4436–4443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strother, M.C.; Michel, K.F.; Xia, L.; McWilliams, K.; Guzzo, T.J.; Lee, D.J.; Lee, D.I. Prolonged Length of Stay After Robotic Prostatectomy: Causes and Risk Factors. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2020, 27, 1560–1567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xia, L.; Taylor, B.L.; Pulido, J.E.; Mucksavage, P.; Lee, D.I.; Guzzo, T.J. Predischarge Predictors of Readmissions and Postdischarge Complications in Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy. J. Endourol. 2017, 31, 864–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salciccia, S.; Rosati, D.; Viscuso, P.; Canale, V.; Scarrone, E.; Frisenda, M.; Catuzzi, R.; Moriconi, M.; Asero, V.; Signore, S.; et al. Influence of operative time and blood loss on surgical margins and functional outcomes for laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective analysis. Central Eur. J. Urol. 2021, 74, 503–515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clavien, P.A.; Barkun, J.; de Oliveira, M.L.; Vauthey, J.N.; Dindo, D.; Schulick, R.D.; et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg. 2009, 250, 187–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Potretzke, A.M.; Kim, E.H.; Knight, B.A.; Anderson, B.G.; Park, A.M.; Figenshau, R.S.; Bhayani, S.B. Patient comorbidity predicts hospital length of stay after robot-assisted prostatectomy. J. Robot. Surg. 2016, 10, 151–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tomaszewski, J.J.; Matchett, J.C.; Davies, B.J.; Jackman, S.V.; Hrebinko, R.L.; Nelson, J.B. Comparative Hospital Cost-analysis of Open and Robotic-assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Urology 2012, 80, 126–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El Hajj, A.; Labban, M.; Ploussard, G.; Zarka, J.; Heidar, N.A.; Mailhac, A.; Tamim, H. Patient characteristics predicting prolonged length of hospital stay following robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Ther. Adv. Urol. 2022, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobbs, R.W.; Nguyen, T.T.; Shahait, M.; Lee, D.J.; Kim, J.L.; El-Fahmawi, A.; et al. Outpatient Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Are Patients Ready for Same-Day Discharge? J Endourol. 2020, 34, 450–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krausewitz, P.; Farzat, M.; Ellinger, J.; Ritter, M. Omitting routine cystography after RARP : Analysis of complications and readmission rates in suprapubic and transurethral drained patients. Int. J. Urol. 2022, 30, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lantz, A.W.; Stranne, J.; Tyritzis, S.I.; Bock, D.; Wallin, D.; Nilsson, H.; Carlsson, S.; Thorsteinsdottir, T.; Gustafsson, O.; Hugosson, J.; et al. 90-Day readmission after radical prostatectomy—a prospective comparison between robot-assisted and open surgery. Scand. J. Urol. 2019, 53, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wenzel, M.; Preisser, F.; Theissen, L.H.; Humke, C.; Welte, M.N.; Wittler, C.; Kluth, L.A.; Karakiewicz, P.I.; Chun, F.K.H.; Mandel, P.; et al. The Effect of Adverse Patient Characteristics on Perioperative Outcomes in Open and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Front. Surg. 2020, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, M.S.; Jang, W.S.; Chung, D.Y.; Koh, D.H.; Lee, J.S.; Goh, H.J.; Choi, Y.D. Effect of prostate gland weight on the surgical and oncological outcomes of extraperitoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BMC Urol. 2019, 19, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galfano, A.; Panarello, D.; Secco, S.; Di Trapani, D.; Barbieri, M.; Napoli, G.; et al. Does prostate volume have an impact on the functional and oncological results of Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? Minerva Urol Nefrol. 2018, 70, 408–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Novara, G.; Ficarra, V.; Rosen, R.C.; Artibani, W.; Costello, A.; Eastham, J.A.; Graefen, M.; Guazzoni, G.; Shariat, S.F.; Stolzenburg, J.-U.; et al. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Perioperative Outcomes and Complications After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy. Eur. Urol. 2012, 62, 431–452. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
| Total (500) | Short n=157; 31.4% |
Middle n=255; 51% |
Long n=88; 17,6% |
p-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (year) Mean ± SD Median |
66.8 ± 7.1 68 |
67 ± 6.7 68 |
67 ± 6.5 68 |
65.7 ± 9 67 |
0.260 |
| ASA-score 1 2 3 Missing |
96 (19,2) 314 (62,8) 82 (16,4) 8 (1,6) |
36 (22,9) 90 (57,3) 28 (17,8) 3 (1,9) |
40 (15,7) 175 (68,6) 36 (14,1) 4 (1,6) |
20 (22,7) 49 (55,7) 18 (20,5) 1 (1,1) |
0.777 |
| Preoperative HGB (g/dl) Mean ± SD median |
14.7 ± 1.3 14.8 |
14.6 ± 1.1 14.8 |
14.7 ± 1.5 14.8 |
14.9 ± 1 11 |
0.613 |
| IPSS Mean ±SD median |
11.4 ± 8.3 8.3 |
11 ± 8.3 10 |
11.3 ± 8.1 10 |
12.9 ± 9 11 |
0.383 |
| IIEF Mean ± SD median |
15.2 ± 8.7 17 |
14.6 ± 8.5 17 |
15.6 ±8.8 16 |
15.8 ±7.8 16 |
0.261 |
| Initial PSA (ng/ml) Mean ± SD median |
14.8 ± 24.5 8 |
16.2 ±27.8 7.5 |
13.8 ±20.6 8 |
16.5 ± 26.2 9.3 |
0.941 |
| BMI | 28.4 ± 4.3 28 |
27.7 ± 4.5 27 |
28.8 ±4.4 28 |
28.7 ±4.4 28 |
0.261 |
| Prostate-Volume (ml) Mean ± SD median |
49 ± 28 43 |
47 ± 23 44 |
49 ± 27 44 |
53 ± 38 44 |
0.236 |
| Pre-treatment Medical (NHT) Surgical (TUR-P) |
55 (11) 34 (6,8) |
16 () 14 (8,9) |
28 (11) 16 (6,3) |
11 (12,5) 4 (4,5) |
0.881 0.379 |
| D’Amico Risk Classification Low risk Intermediate risk High risk |
117 (23,4) 229 (45,8) 154 (30,8) |
30 (19,1) 78 (49,7) 49 (31,2) |
64 (25,1) 112 (43,9) 79 (31) |
23 (26,1) 39 (44,3) 26 (29,5) |
0.627 |
| Preoperative Gleason score 5 6 3+4 4+3 8 9 10 Unclassified |
1 (0,2) 140 (28) 176 (35,2) 59 (11,8) 82 (16,4) 36 (7,2) 5 (1,0) 1 (0,2) |
1 (0,6) 35 (22,3) 63 (40,1) 20 (12,7) 27 (17,2) 10 (6,4) 1 (0,6) 0 |
0 77 (30,2) 80 (31,4) 33 (12,9) 44 (17,3) 16 (6,3) 4 (1,6) 1 (0,4) |
28 (12,5) 33 (37,5) 6 (6,8) 11 (12,5) 10 (11,4) 0 0 |
0.200 |
| Nerve Sparing Yes Partial No |
374 (69,4) 19 (3,8) 134 (26,8) |
99 (63,1) 12 (7,6) 46 (29,3) |
184 (72,2) 3 (1,2) 68 (26,7) |
64 (72,7) 4 (4,5) 20 (22,7) |
0.548 |
| Total (500) | Short 157; 31.4% |
Middle 255; 51% |
Long 88; 17,6% |
p-Value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR-Time Mean ± SD IQR median |
151 ± 45 120-180 140 |
109 ±13 100-120 115 |
150 ± 17 135-160 150 |
228 ±38 200-240 215 |
<0.001 |
| Prostate weight (g) Mean ± SD median |
61± 25.6 55 |
60 ± 21.9 57 |
62.9 ± 25.7 57 |
61.2 ± 30 54 |
0.546 |
| Pathological stage 0 pT1 pT2 pT3 pT4 |
1 (0,2) 1 (0,2) 295 (59) 183 (36,6) 20 (4,0) |
0 0 91 (58) 60 (38,2) 6 (3,8) |
1 (0,4) 0 147 (57,7) 100 (39,2) 7 (2,7) |
0 1 (1,1) 57 (64,7) 23 (26,2) 7 (8) |
0.027 |
| Postoperative Gleason score 6 3+4 4+3 8 9 10 Unclassified* |
28 (5,6) 282 (56,4) 89 (17,8) 26 (5,2) 29 (5,8) 1 (0,2) 45 (9,0) |
11 (7) 86 (54,8) 23 (14,6) 11 (7) 10 (6,4) 1 (0,6) 15 (9,6) |
12 (4,7) 152 (59,6) 46 (18) 10 (3,9) 11 (4,3) 0 24 (9,4) |
5 (5,7) 44 (59) 20 (22,7) 5 (5,7) 8 (9,1) 0 6 (6,8) |
0.217 |
| Positive surgical margins | 36 (7,2) | 12 (7,6) | 17 (6,6) | 7 (8) | 0.892 |
| Number of Lymph nodes Mean ± SD median |
19.6± 7.4 18 |
19.2 ± 7.2 18 |
19.7 ± 7.3 18.5 |
20.9 ± 8.1 19 |
0.325 |
| Positive Lymph nodes | 87 (17,4) | 26 (16,6) | 48 (18,8) | 13 (14,8) | 0.651 |
| Hgb-Difference (g/dl) Mean ± SD median |
2.5 ± 4.8 2.6 |
2.5 ± 1.2 2.5 |
2.6 ± 1.38 2.5 |
3.18 ± 1.3 3 |
0.001 |
| Transfusion | 7 (1,2) | 2 (1,3) | 2 (0,8) | 3 (3,3) | 0.892 |
| hospitalization (days) Mean ± SD median |
5.6 ± 1.5 5 |
5.2 ± 1.1 5 |
5.5 ± 1.1 5 |
6.4 ± 2.7 6 |
<0.001 |
| Catheter days Mean ± SD median |
6.9 ± 4.7 5 |
6.2 ± 3.7 4 |
6.8 ±4.6 5 |
9.1 ± 6.1 7 |
<0.001 |
| Suprabubic Catheter removed before discharge | 368 (73.6%) | 129 (82,2%) | 192 (75,3%) | 47 (53,4%) | <0.001 |
| Complications in detail | Total (n=500) |
Short 157; 31.4 |
Middle 255; 51 |
Long 88; 17,6 |
p-value | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Minor | 74 (14,8) | 25 (15,9) | 32 (12,5) | 17 (19,3) | 0.272 | ||
| Minor |
CDI 51 (10,2) |
VTE | 4 (0,8) | 0 | 2 (0,8) | 2 (2,3) | 0.160 |
| Elevated blood analysis Parameters | 6 (1,2) | 4 (2,4) | 1 (0,4) | 1 (1,1) | |||
| AUR | 28 (5,6) | 11 (7) | 11(4,3) | 6 (6,8) | |||
| Diverse | 13 (2,6) | 6 (3,6) | 6 (2,4) | 1 (1,1) | |||
| CD II 23 (4,6) |
Secondary VUAL* | 11 (2,2) | 2 (1,3) | 7 (2,7) | 2 (2,3) | ||
| UTI | 11 (2,2) | 2 (1,3) | 4 (1,6) | 5 (5,7) | |||
| Hematoma requiring Transfusion | 1 (0,2) | 0 | 1 (0,4) | 0 | |||
| Major | 21 (4,2) | 4 (2,5) | 8 (3,1) | 9 (10,2) | 0.008 | ||
| Major | CD III a 12 (2,4) |
Myocardial infarction | 1 (0,2) | 0 | 1 (0,4) | 0 | |
| Hiatus Hernia | 1 (0,2) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1,1) | |||
| Symptomatic Lymphocele | 10 (2.0) | 4 (2,5) | 4 (1,6) | 2 (2,3) | |||
| CD III b 8 (1,6) |
Revision | 5 (1.0) | 0 | 3 (1,2) | 2 (2,3) | ||
| UUTO | 3 (0,6) | 0 | 0 | 3 (3,3) | |||
| CD VI 1 (0,2) |
Rhabdomyolysis | 1 (0,2) | 0 | 0 | 1 (1,1) | ||
| Readmissions* | 28 (5,6) | 6 (3,8) | 15 (5,9) | 7 (8) | 0.338 | ||
| Readmission | Minor | Major complications | Catheter days | Hospital stay | lymphoceles | Positive surgical margins | Urinoma | Pulmonary Embolism | Transfusion | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| console-Time | 0.417 | 0.527 | 0.569 | 0.012 | <0.001 | 0.373 | 0.664 | 0.234 | 0.190 | 0.073 |
| D’Amico classification |
Prostate Volume | BMI | PSA | Gleason score | Previous medical treatment (NHT) | Previous Prostate surgery |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| console-Time | 0.643 |
0.005 |
0.904 | 0.484 | 0.274 | 0.998 | 0.114 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
