Peritoneal Flap in Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy.
Journal
Deutsches Arzteblatt international
ISSN: 1866-0452
Titre abrégé: Dtsch Arztebl Int
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 101475967
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 04 2020
03 04 2020
Historique:
received:
01
08
2019
revised:
01
08
2019
accepted:
30
12
2019
entrez:
26
5
2020
pubmed:
26
5
2020
medline:
9
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Lymphocele is the most common complication arising after pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in the setting of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). The only data available until now on the utility of a peritoneal flap to prevent lymphocele were retrospectively acquired. A randomized, controlled, multi-center trial with blinded assessment of endpoints was carried out on 232 patients with prostate cancer who underwent RARP with PLND. The patients in the intervention group were given a peritoneal flap; in the control group, surgery was performed without this modification. The two joint primary endpoints were the rates of symptomatic lymphocele during the same hospitalization as the operative procedure (iT1) and within 90 days of surgery (iT2). The secondary endpoints were lymphocele volume, the need for treatment of lymphocele, complications requiring an intervention, and the degree of postoperative stress incontinence. German Clinical Trials Register number: DRKS00011115. The data were evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis, which, in this trial, was identical to an as-treated analysis. 108 patients (46.6%) were allotted to the intervention group. There were no statistically significant intergroup differences with respect to any clinical or histopathological criteria. A median of 16 lymph nodes were removed (interquartile range, 11-21). A symptomatic lymphocele arose in 1.3% (iT1) and 9.1% (iT2) of the patients, without any statistically significant difference between the two trial groups (p = 0.599 and p = 0.820, respectively). Nor did the groups differ significantly with respect to lymphocele volume (p = 0.670 on hospital discharge [T1], p = 0.650 90 days after surgery [T2]) or the type and frequency of need for subsequent surgical intervention (p = 0.535; iT2). 81.5% of all patients (n = 189) had no complications at all in the first three months after surgery. Nor were there any intergroup differences at 90 days with respect to the degree of stress urinary incontinence (p = 0.306) or complications (p = 0.486). A peritoneal flap after RARP was not found to influence the rate of postoperative lymphocele, whether asymptomatic or requiring treatment.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Lymphocele is the most common complication arising after pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) in the setting of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). The only data available until now on the utility of a peritoneal flap to prevent lymphocele were retrospectively acquired.
METHODS
A randomized, controlled, multi-center trial with blinded assessment of endpoints was carried out on 232 patients with prostate cancer who underwent RARP with PLND. The patients in the intervention group were given a peritoneal flap; in the control group, surgery was performed without this modification. The two joint primary endpoints were the rates of symptomatic lymphocele during the same hospitalization as the operative procedure (iT1) and within 90 days of surgery (iT2). The secondary endpoints were lymphocele volume, the need for treatment of lymphocele, complications requiring an intervention, and the degree of postoperative stress incontinence. German Clinical Trials Register number: DRKS00011115.
RESULTS
The data were evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis, which, in this trial, was identical to an as-treated analysis. 108 patients (46.6%) were allotted to the intervention group. There were no statistically significant intergroup differences with respect to any clinical or histopathological criteria. A median of 16 lymph nodes were removed (interquartile range, 11-21). A symptomatic lymphocele arose in 1.3% (iT1) and 9.1% (iT2) of the patients, without any statistically significant difference between the two trial groups (p = 0.599 and p = 0.820, respectively). Nor did the groups differ significantly with respect to lymphocele volume (p = 0.670 on hospital discharge [T1], p = 0.650 90 days after surgery [T2]) or the type and frequency of need for subsequent surgical intervention (p = 0.535; iT2). 81.5% of all patients (n = 189) had no complications at all in the first three months after surgery. Nor were there any intergroup differences at 90 days with respect to the degree of stress urinary incontinence (p = 0.306) or complications (p = 0.486).
CONCLUSION
A peritoneal flap after RARP was not found to influence the rate of postoperative lymphocele, whether asymptomatic or requiring treatment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32449896
pii: arztebl.2020.0243
doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2020.0243
pmc: PMC7264288
doi:
pii:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
243-250Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Références
Eur Urol. 2009 Jun;55(6):1251-65
pubmed: 19297079
Eur Urol Oncol. 2018 Oct;1(5):443-448
pubmed: 31158086
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2011 Feb;136(8):e2-8
pubmed: 21312152
BJU Int. 2009 Apr;103(8):1108-10
pubmed: 19021618
J Urol. 2010 Apr;183(4):1464-8
pubmed: 20171689
Curr Urol Rep. 2014 Oct;15(10):445
pubmed: 25129450
Scand J Urol Nephrol. 2003;37(3):218-21
pubmed: 12775280
JAMA. 1998 Sep 16;280(11):969-74
pubmed: 9749478
World J Urol. 2008 Dec;26(6):581-6
pubmed: 18777125
BJU Int. 2011 Apr;107 Suppl 3:7-10
pubmed: 21492369
Urology. 2010 Aug;76(2):398-401
pubmed: 20346487
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016 Apr 8;113(14):235-41
pubmed: 27146591
Urology. 2009 Aug;74(2):296-302
pubmed: 19515403
BJU Int. 2011 Oct;108(7):1185-90
pubmed: 21489117
Adv Urol. 2016;2016:2367432
pubmed: 27418927
Eur Urol. 2017 Jul;72(1):84-109
pubmed: 28126351
J Endourol. 2017 Oct;31(10):1037-1043
pubmed: 28741376
Eur Urol. 2006 Nov;50(5):1006-13
pubmed: 16959399
Urology. 2015 Jun;85(6):1505-9
pubmed: 26099895
Gynakol Rundsch. 1983;23(3):166-74
pubmed: 6642284
Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13
pubmed: 15273542
World J Urol. 2018 Apr;36(4):609-621
pubmed: 29362896
Eur Urol. 2017 Feb;71(2):155-158
pubmed: 27544575
Urology. 2010 Mar;75(3):630-5
pubmed: 19476977
Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):618-629
pubmed: 27568654
Eur Urol. 2014 Jan;65(1):7-16
pubmed: 23582879
BJU Int. 2016 Jul;118(1):127-31
pubmed: 26800257
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016 May 13;113(19):329-36
pubmed: 27232362
World J Urol. 2013 Jun;31(3):481-8
pubmed: 23512231
Ann Intern Med. 2010 Jun 1;152(11):726-32
pubmed: 20335313
J Robot Surg. 2020 Jun;14(3):439-445
pubmed: 31422556
J Endourol. 2011 Jun;25(6):969-73
pubmed: 21542773
Urology. 2018 Aug;118:134-140
pubmed: 29775698