دورية أكاديمية
Complications of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: multi-institutional analysis from the Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC).
| العنوان: | Complications of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: multi-institutional analysis from the Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC). |
|---|---|
| المؤلفون: | Soputro NA; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA., Chavali JS; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA., Ferguson EL; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA., Ramos-Carpinteyro R; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA., Calvo RS; University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, IL, USA., Nguyen J; Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA., Moschovas MC; Advent Health Medical Group Urology, Celebration, FL, USA., Wilder S; Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA., Okhawere K; Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City, NY, USA., De La Rosa RS; Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA., Saini I; Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City, NY, USA., Peabody J; Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA., Badani KK; Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA., Rogers C; Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA., Joseph J; University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA., Nix J; University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA., Patel V; Advent Health Medical Group Urology, Celebration, FL, USA., Stifelman M; Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA.; Hackensack Meridien School of Medicine, Hackensack, NJ, USA., Ahmed M; Hackensack University Medical Center, Hackensack, NJ, USA.; Hackensack Meridien School of Medicine, Hackensack, NJ, USA., Crivellaro S; University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, IL, USA., Kim M; Orange County Urology Associates, Laguna Hills, CA, USA., Kaouk JH; Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. |
| المصدر: | BJU international [BJU Int] 2024 Jul; Vol. 134 (1), pp. 54-62. Date of Electronic Publication: 2023 Dec 03. |
| نوع المنشور: | Journal Article; Multicenter Study |
| اللغة: | English |
| بيانات الدورية: | Publisher: Blackwell Science Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 100886721 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1464-410X (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14644096 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BJU Int Subsets: MEDLINE |
| أسماء مطبوعة: | Original Publication: Oxford, UK : Blackwell Science, c1999- |
| مواضيع طبية MeSH: | Prostatectomy*/methods , Prostatectomy*/adverse effects , Robotic Surgical Procedures*/adverse effects , Robotic Surgical Procedures*/methods , Postoperative Complications*/etiology , Postoperative Complications*/epidemiology , Prostatic Neoplasms*/surgery, Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Retrospective Studies ; Aged ; Intraoperative Complications/etiology ; Intraoperative Complications/epidemiology ; Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data |
| مستخلص: | Objective: To evaluate the perioperative complications of single-port robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (SP-RARP). Patients and Methods: A retrospective review was performed on the prospectively maintained, Institutional Review Board-approved, multi-institutional Single-Port Advanced Research Consortium (SPARC) database. A total of 1103 patients were identified who underwent three different approaches of SP-RARP between 2019 and 2022 using the purpose-built SP robotic platform. In addition to baseline clinical, perioperative outcomes, this study comprehensively analysed for any evidence of intraoperative complication, as well as postoperative complication and readmission within 90 days of the respective surgery. Results: Of the 244, 712, and 147 patients who underwent transperitoneal, extraperitoneal, and transvesical SP-RARP, respectively, intraoperative complications were noted in five patients (0.4%), all of which occurred during the transperitoneal approach. Two patients had bowel serosal tears, two had posterior button-holing of the bladder necessitating repair, and one patient had an obturator nerve injury. Postoperative complications were noted in 143 patients (13%) with major complications (Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥III) only identified in 3.7% of the total cohort. The most common complications were lymphocele (3.9%), acute urinary retention (2%), and urinary tract infection (1.9%). The 90-day re-admission rate was 3.9%. Conclusion: The SP-RARP is a safe and effective procedure with low complication and readmission rates regardless of the approach. These results are comparable to current multi-port RARP literature. (© 2023 BJU International.) |
| References: | Autorino R, Kaouk JH, Stolzenburg J‐U et al. Current status and future directions of robotic single‐site surgery: a systematic review. Eur Urol 2013; 63: 266–280. Kaouk J, Bertolo R, Eltemamy M, Garisto J. Single‐port robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: first clinical experience using the SP surgical system. Urology 2019; 124: 309. Kaouk J, Valero R, Sawczyn G, Garisto J. Extraperitoneal single‐port robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: initial experience and description of technique. BJU Int 2020; 125: 182–189. Moschovas MC, Brady I, Jaber AR et al. Da Vinci SP radical prostatectomy: a multicentric collaboration and step‐by‐step techniques. Int Braz J Urol 2022; 48: 728–729. Ramos‐Carpinteyro R, Ferguson EL, Chavali JS, Geskin A, Kaouk J. First 100 cases of transvesical single‐port robotic radical prostatectomy. Asian J Urol 2023; 178: 76–82. Kaouk J, Ferguson E, Ramos‐Carpinteyro R et al. Transvesical percutaneous access allows for epidural anesthesia without mechanical ventilation in single‐port robotic radical and simple prostatectomy. Urology 2023; 175: 209–215. Briganti A, Larcher A, Abdollah F et al. Updated nomogram predicting lymph node invasion in patients with prostate cancer undergoing extended pelvic lymph node dissection: the essential importance of percentage of positive cores. Eur Urol 2012; 61: 480–487. Bajpai RR, Razdan S, Sanchez‐Gonzalez MA, Reddy BN, Razdan S. Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy after prior transurethral resection of prostate: an analysis of perioperative, functional, pathologic, and oncologic outcomes. J Endourol 2022; 36: 1063–1069. Carbin DD, Tamhankar AS, Ahluwalia P, Gautam G. Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in indian men of age 75 years and above: a propensity score‐matched analysis. J Robot Surg 2022; 16: 799–806. De Groote R, Nathan A, De Bleser E et al. Techniques and outcomes of salvage robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (sRARP). Eur Urol 2020; 78: 885–892. Egan J, Marhamati S, Carvalho FL et al. Retzius‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy leads to durable improvement in urinary function and quality of life versus standard robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy without compromise on oncologic efficacy: single‐surgeon series and step‐by‐step guide. Eur Urol 2021; 79: 839–857. Fonseca J, Moraes‐Fontes MF, Rebola J et al. Retzius‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in a medium size oncological center holds adequate oncological and functional outcomes. J Robot Surg 2023; 17: 1133–1142. Hagras A, Ghaith A, Alenzi M et al. Retzius‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy versus open retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparative study with 19‐month follow‐up. Minerva Urol Nefrol 2020; 72: 586–594. Hill GT, Jeyanthi M, Coomer W et al. Same‐day discharge robot‐assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: feasibility, safety and patient experience. BJU Int 2023; 132: 92–99. Kato D, Ebara S, Tatenuma T et al. Short‐term oncological and surgical outcomes of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: a retrospective multicenter cohort study in Japan (the MSUG94 group). Asian J Endoscop Surg 2022; 15: 745–752. Khalil MI, Bhandari NR, Payakachat N, Davis R, Raheem OA, Kamel MH. Perioperative mortality and morbidity of outpatient versus inpatient robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: a propensity matched analysis. Urol Oncol 2020; 38: 3.e1–3.e6. Leyh‐Bannurah S‐R, Wagner C, Schuette A et al. Feasibility of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in men at senior age≥ 75 years: perioperative, functional, and oncological outcomes of a high‐volume center. Aging Male 2022; 25: 8–16. Lumen N, Lambert E, Poelaert F, Wirtz M, Verbeke S, Van Praet C. Retzius‐sparing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy. J Visual Exp 2022; 183: e63592. Noël J, Moschovas MC, Sandri M, Jaber AR, Rogers T, Patel V. Comparing the outcomes of robotic assisted radical prostatectomy in black and white men: experience of a high‐volume center. Int Braz J Urol 2023; 49: 123–135. Ploussard G, Almeras C, Beauval J‐B et al. Same‐day discharge surgery for robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in the era of ERAS and prehabilitation pathways: a contemporary, comparative, feasibility study. World J Urol 2020; 40: 1359–1365. Qin Y, Han H, Xue Y et al. Comparison and trend of perioperative outcomes between robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy and open radical prostatectomy: nationwide inpatient sample 2009–2014. Int Braz J Urol 2020; 46: 754–771. Reddy SS, Noël J, Covas Moschovas M et al. Same‐day discharge protocol for robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: experience of a high‐volume referral center. J Endourol 2022; 36: 934–940. Shahait M, Dobbs RW, Kim JL et al. Perioperative and functional outcomes of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in octogenarian men. J Endourol 2021; 35: 1025–1029. Tuğcu V, Ekşi M, Sahin S et al. Robot‐assisted radical perineal prostatectomy: a review of 95 cases. BJU Int 2020; 125: 573–578. Uchida T, Higure T, Kawakami M et al. What factors affect the operative time of robot‐assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy? Surg Endosc 2021; 35: 4436–4443. Xu Y, Liu A, Chen L et al. Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathway optimizes outcomes and costs for minimally invasive radical prostatectomy. J Int Med Res 2020; 48: 1–12. Yamada Y, Teshima T, Fujimura T et al. Comparison of perioperative outcomes in elderly (age ≧ 75 years) vs. younger men undergoing robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy. PloS One 2020; 15: e0234113. Yılmaz K, Ölçücü MT, Özsoy Ç, Aksaray EE, Kılıç Ş, Ateş M. Comparison of early urinary continence, oncological outcomes, and postoperative complications in Retzius‐sparing and standard approach robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy. J Laparoendoscop Adv Surg Techn 2023; 33: 150–154. Goßler C, May M, Breyer J 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. Ramos‐Carpinteyro R, Ferguson EL, Chavali JS, Geskin A, Soputro N, Kaouk J. Single‐port Transvesical robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: the surgical learning curve of the first 100 cases. Urology 2023; 178: 76–82. |
| فهرسة مساهمة: | Keywords: complication; minimally invasive surgery; radical prostatectomy; robot‐assisted surgery; single‐port |
| تواريخ الأحداث: | Date Created: 20231116 Date Completed: 20240618 Latest Revision: 20240618 |
| رمز التحديث: | 20240619 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/bju.16228 |
| PMID: | 37971182 |
| قاعدة البيانات: | MEDLINE |
Full Text Finder | تدمد: | 1464-410X |
|---|---|
| DOI: | 10.1111/bju.16228 |