Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Robotic Surgery
Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery 4/2023

17-03-2023 | Prostate Cancer | Review

Perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy previous transurethral resection of prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials

Authors: Yang Liu, Jiao Qin, Kun-peng Li, Zhi Wen, Jing Huang, Yu Jiang, Cai-xia Chen, Chong-jian Wang, Li Wang, Jia-hao Wang, Xue-song Yang

Published in: Journal of Robotic Surgery | Issue 4/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

The influence of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) on patients who have previously undergone transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) versus TURP-naive patients is still debatable. The present study aimed to compare perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes of RARP between TURP and Non-TURP groups. We systematically searched the databases such as Science, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library database to identify relevant studies published in English up to August 2022. Review Manager was used to compare various parameters. The study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022378126). Eight comparative trials with a total of 4186 participants were conducted. The TURP group had a longer operative time (WMD 22.22 min, 95% CI 8.48, 35.95; p = 0.002), a longer catheterization time (WMD 1.32 day, 95% CI 0.37, 2.26; p = 0.006), a higher estimated blood loss (WMD 23.86 mL, 95% CI 2.81, 44.90; p = 0.03), and higher bladder neck reconstruction rate (OR 8.02, 95% CI 3.07, 20.93; p < 0.0001). Moreover, the positive surgical margin (PSM) was higher in the TURP group (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.12, 1.98 p = 0.007). However, there was no difference between the two groups regarding the length of hospital stay, transfusion rates, nerve-sparing status, complication rates, long-term continence, potency rates and biochemical recurrence (BCR). Performing RARP on patients who have previously undergone TURP is a safe procedure. Furthermore, the current findings demonstrated that the TURP group had comparable oncologic and long-term functional outcomes to the Non-TURP group.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R et al (2006) Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)—incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol 50:969–979 (Discussion 980)CrossRefPubMed
2.
Perera M, Lawrentschuk N, Perera N et al (2016) Incidental prostate cancer in transurethral resection of prostate specimens in men aged up to 65 years. Prostate Int 4:11–14CrossRefPubMed
3.
Merrill RM, Wiggins CL (2002) Incidental detection of population-based prostate cancer incidence rates through transurethral resection of the prostate. Urol Oncol 7:213–219CrossRefPubMed
4.
Kanno H, Umemoto S, Izumi K et al (2006) Prostate cancer development after transurethral resection of the prostate–histopathological studies of radical prostatectomy specimens. Jpn J Urol 97:649–659CrossRef
5.
Mustafa M, Pettaway CA, Davis JW et al (2015) Robotic or open radical prostatectomy after previous open surgery in the pelvic region. Korean J Urol 56:131–137CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
Yang Y, Luo Y, Hou GL et al (2015) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy after previous transurethral resection of the prostate in clinical T1a and T1b prostate cancer: a matched-pair analysis. Urol J 12:2154–2159PubMed
7.
Fragkoulis C, Pappas A, Theocharis G et al (2018) Open radical prostatectomy after transurethral resection: perioperative, functional, oncologic outcomes. Can J Urol 25:9262–9267PubMed
8.
Martin AD, Desai PJ, Nunez RN et al (2009) Does a history of previous surgery or radiation to the prostate affect outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? BJU Int 103:1696–1698CrossRefPubMed
9.
Agcaoglu O, Aliyev S, Karabulut K et al (2012) Robotic versus laparoscopic resection of large adrenal tumors. Ann Surg Oncol 19:2288–2294CrossRefPubMed
10.
Ilic D, Evans SM, Allan CA et al (2017) Laparoscopic and robotic-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy for the treatment of localised prostate cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 9:Cd009625PubMed
11.
Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M et al (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 350:g7647CrossRefPubMed
12.
13.
14.
Sterne JA, Gavaghan D, Egger M (2000) Publication and related bias in meta-analysis: power of statistical tests and prevalence in the literature. J Clin Epidemiol 53:1119–1129CrossRefPubMed
15.
16.
Bajpai RR, Razdan S, Sanchez-Gonzalez MA et al (2022) Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy after prior transurethral resection of prostate: an analysis of perioperative, functional, pathologic, and oncologic outcomes. J Endourol 36:1063–1069CrossRefPubMed
17.
18.
19.
Su YK, Katz BF, Sehgal SS et al (2015) Does previous transurethral prostate surgery affect oncologic and continence outcomes after RARP? J Robot Surg 9:291–297CrossRefPubMed
20.
Hung CF, Yang CK, Ou YC (2014) Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy following transurethral resection of the prostate: perioperative, oncologic and functional outcomes. Prostate Int 2:82–89CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Zugor V, Labanaris AP, Porres D et al (2012) Surgical, oncologic, and short-term functional outcomes in patients undergoing robot-assisted prostatectomy after previous transurethral resection of the prostate. J Endourol 26:515–519CrossRefPubMed
22.
Gupta NP, Singh P, Nayyar R (2011) Outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in men with previous transurethral resection of prostate. BJU Int 108:1501–1505CrossRefPubMed
23.
Hampton L, Nelson RA, Satterthwaite R et al (2008) Patients with prior TURP undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy have higher positive surgical margin rates. J Robot Surg 2:213–216CrossRefPubMed
24.
von Hippel PT (2015) The heterogeneity statistic I(2) can be biased in small meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol 15:35CrossRef
25.
Fleming ND, Axtell AE, Lentz SE (2012) Operative and anesthetic outcomes in endometrial cancer staging via three minimally invasive methods. J Robot Surg 6:337–344CrossRefPubMed
26.
Wolanski P, Chabert C, Jones L et al (2012) Preliminary results of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) after fellowship training and experience in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP). BJU Int 110(Suppl 4):64–70CrossRefPubMed
27.
Park JW, Won Lee H, Kim W et al (2011) Comparative assessment of a single surgeon’s series of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: conventional versus robot-assisted. J Endourol 25:597–602CrossRefPubMed
28.
Park B, Kim W, Jeong BC et al (2013) Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes of pure versus robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed by a single surgeon. Scand J Urol 47:10–18CrossRefPubMed
29.
Teber D, Cresswell J, Ates M et al (2009) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in clinical T1a and T1b prostate cancer: oncologic and functional outcomes—a matched-pair analysis. Urology 73:577–581CrossRefPubMed
30.
Colombo R, Naspro R, Salonia A et al (2006) Radical prostatectomy after previous prostate surgery: clinical and functional outcomes. J Urol 176:2459–2463 (Discussion 2463)CrossRefPubMed
31.
Palisaar JR, Wenske S, Sommerer F et al (2009) Open radical retropubic prostatectomy gives favourable surgical and functional outcomes after transurethral resection of the prostate. BJU Int 104:611–615CrossRefPubMed
32.
Menard J, de la Taille A, Hoznek A et al (2008) Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy after transurethral resection of the prostate: surgical and functional outcomes. Urology 72:593–597CrossRefPubMed
33.
Yazici S, Inci K, Yuksel S et al (2009) Radical prostatectomy after previous prostate surgery: effects on surgical difficulty and pathologic outcomes. Urology 73:856–859CrossRefPubMed
34.
35.
Liao H, Duan X, Du Y et al (2020) Radical prostatectomy after previous transurethral resection of the prostate: oncological, surgical and functional outcomes-a meta-analysis. World J Urol 38:1919–1932CrossRefPubMed
36.
37.
Holze S, Mende M, Healy KV et al (2019) Comparison of various continence definitions in a large group of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy: a multicentre, prospective study. BMC Urol 19:70CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
38.
Nyberg M, Sjoberg DD, Carlsson SV et al (2021) Surgeon heterogeneity significantly affects functional and oncological outcomes after radical prostatectomy in the Swedish LAPPRO trial. BJU Int 127:361–368CrossRefPubMed
39.
Sachdeva A, Veeratterapillay R, Voysey A et al (2017) Positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence following minimally-invasive radical prostatectomy—an analysis of outcomes from a UK tertiary referral centre. BMC Urol 17:91CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Coelho RF, Chauhan S, Orvieto MA et al (2010) Predictive factors for positive surgical margins and their locations after robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol 57:1022–1029CrossRefPubMed
41.
Suardi N, Scattoni V, Briganti A et al (2008) Nerve-sparing radical retropubic prostatectomy in patients previously submitted to holmium laser enucleation of the prostate for bladder outlet obstruction due to benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol 53:1180–1185CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy previous transurethral resection of prostate: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative trials
Authors
Yang Liu
Jiao Qin
Kun-peng Li
Zhi Wen
Jing Huang
Yu Jiang
Cai-xia Chen
Chong-jian Wang
Li Wang
Jia-hao Wang
Xue-song Yang
Publication date
17-03-2023
Publisher
Springer London
Published in
Journal of Robotic Surgery / Issue 4/2023
Print ISSN: 1863-2483
Electronic ISSN: 1863-2491
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01555-5

Other articles of this Issue 4/2023

Journal of Robotic Surgery 4/2023 Go to the issue

Research

No prostate? No problem: robotic inguinal hernia repair after prostatectomy

Research

Impact of perinephric fat volume and the Mayo Adhesive Probability score on time to clamping in robot-assisted partial nephrectomy

Research

Objective assessment of intraoperative skills for robot-assisted partial nephrectomy (RAPN)

Research

Cost-effectiveness of robotic-assisted surgery vs open surgery in the context of partial nephrectomy for small kidney tumors

Research

Comparison between intra- and postoperative outcomes of the da Vinci SP and da Vinci Xi robotic platforms in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy

Research

Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic right colectomy node retrieval in the obese population