The Impact of Previous Prostate Surgery on Surgical Outcomes for Patients Treated with Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy for Bladder Cancer.


Journal

European urology
ISSN: 1873-7560
Titre abrégé: Eur Urol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 7512719

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2021
Historique:
received: 27 12 2020
accepted: 12 02 2021
pubmed: 4 3 2021
medline: 15 3 2022
entrez: 3 3 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

The feasibility and safety of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) may be undermined by unfavorable preoperative surgical characteristics such as previous prostate surgery (PPS). To compare perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing RARC with versus without a history of PPS. The study included 220 consecutive patients treated with RARC and pelvic lymph node dissection for bladder cancer at a single European tertiary centre. Of these, 43 had previously undergone PPS, defined as transurethral resection of the prostate/holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (n=21) or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (n=22). RARC in patients with a history of PPS. Data on postoperative complications were collected according to the quality criteria for accurate and comprehensive reporting of surgical outcomes recommended by the European Association of Urology guidelines. Multivariable logistic, linear, and Poisson regression analyses were performed to test the effect of PPS on surgical outcomes. Overall, 43 patients (20%) were treated with RARC after PPS. Operative time (OT) was longer in the PPS group (360 vs 330min; p<0.001). Patients with PPS experienced higher rates of intraoperative complications (19% vs 6.8%) and higher rates of 30-d (67% vs 39%), and Clavien-Dindo >3 (33% vs 16%) postoperative complications (all p<0.05). Moreover, the positive surgical margin (PSM) rate after RARC was higher in the PPS group (14% vs 4%; p=0.03). On multivariable analyses, PPS at RARC independently predicted higher risk of intraoperative (odds ratio [OR] 2.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-6.21; p=0.01) and 30-d complications (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.05-5.22; p=0.02), as well as longer OT (relative risk [RR] 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.05; p=0.02) and length of stay (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.26; p=0.02). Lack of randomization represents the main limitation. RARC in patients with a history of PPS is feasible, but it is associated with a higher risk of complications and longer OT and length of stay. Moreover, higher PSM rates have been reported for these patients. Thus, measures aimed at improving surgical outcomes appear to be warranted. We investigated the effect of previous prostate surgery (PPS) on surgical outcomes after robot-assisted removal of the bladder. We found that patients with PPS have a higher risk of complications and longer hospitalization after bladder removal. These patients deserve closer evaluation before this type of bladder operation.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
The feasibility and safety of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) may be undermined by unfavorable preoperative surgical characteristics such as previous prostate surgery (PPS).
OBJECTIVE
To compare perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing RARC with versus without a history of PPS.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
The study included 220 consecutive patients treated with RARC and pelvic lymph node dissection for bladder cancer at a single European tertiary centre. Of these, 43 had previously undergone PPS, defined as transurethral resection of the prostate/holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (n=21) or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (n=22).
SURGICAL PROCEDURE
RARC in patients with a history of PPS.
MEASUREMENTS
Data on postoperative complications were collected according to the quality criteria for accurate and comprehensive reporting of surgical outcomes recommended by the European Association of Urology guidelines. Multivariable logistic, linear, and Poisson regression analyses were performed to test the effect of PPS on surgical outcomes.
RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS
Overall, 43 patients (20%) were treated with RARC after PPS. Operative time (OT) was longer in the PPS group (360 vs 330min; p<0.001). Patients with PPS experienced higher rates of intraoperative complications (19% vs 6.8%) and higher rates of 30-d (67% vs 39%), and Clavien-Dindo >3 (33% vs 16%) postoperative complications (all p<0.05). Moreover, the positive surgical margin (PSM) rate after RARC was higher in the PPS group (14% vs 4%; p=0.03). On multivariable analyses, PPS at RARC independently predicted higher risk of intraoperative (odds ratio [OR] 2.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-6.21; p=0.01) and 30-d complications (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.05-5.22; p=0.02), as well as longer OT (relative risk [RR] 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.05; p=0.02) and length of stay (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02-1.26; p=0.02). Lack of randomization represents the main limitation.
CONCLUSIONS
RARC in patients with a history of PPS is feasible, but it is associated with a higher risk of complications and longer OT and length of stay. Moreover, higher PSM rates have been reported for these patients. Thus, measures aimed at improving surgical outcomes appear to be warranted.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We investigated the effect of previous prostate surgery (PPS) on surgical outcomes after robot-assisted removal of the bladder. We found that patients with PPS have a higher risk of complications and longer hospitalization after bladder removal. These patients deserve closer evaluation before this type of bladder operation.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33653634
pii: S0302-2838(21)00149-4
doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2021.02.029
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Clinical Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

358-365

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2021 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Giuseppe Rosiello (G)

Department of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy; Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium. Electronic address: giusepperosiello@hotmail.it.

Pietro Piazza (P)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium; Department of Urology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Victor Tames (V)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium; Department of Urology, Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain.

Rui Farinha (R)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Artur Paludo (A)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium; Department of Urology, Clinic Hospital of Porto Alegre, Porto Alegre, Brazil.

Stefano Puliatti (S)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium; Department of Urology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.

Marco Amato (M)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium; Department of Urology, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy.

Elio Mazzone (E)

Department of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Ruben De Groote (R)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Camille Berquin (C)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Dries Develtere (D)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Ralf Veys (R)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Celine Sinatti (C)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Riccardo Schiavina (R)

Department of Urology, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.

Geert De Naeyer (G)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Peter Schatteman (P)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Paul Carpentier (P)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Francesco Montorsi (F)

Department of Urology, Division of Experimental Oncology, Urological Research Institute, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy.

Frederiek D'Hondt (F)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Alexandre Mottrie (A)

Department of Urology, Onze-Lieve-Vrouwziekenhuis, Aalst, Belgium; ORSI Academy, Melle, Belgium.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH