Early Catheter Removal After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Results from a Prospective Single-institutional Randomized Trial (Ripreca Study)

被引:16
|
作者
Lista, Giuliana [1 ]
Lughezzani, Giovanni [1 ]
Buffi, Nicolo Maria [1 ,2 ]
Saita, Alberto [1 ]
Vanni, Elena [3 ,4 ]
Hurle, Rodolfo [1 ]
Cardone, Pasquale [5 ]
Peschechera, Roberto [1 ]
Forni, Giovanni [2 ]
Lazzeri, Massimo [1 ]
Guazzoni, Giorgio [1 ,2 ]
Casale, Paolo [1 ]
机构
[1] Humanitas Clin & Res Hosp, Urol, Milan, Italy
[2] Humanitas Univ, Milan, Italy
[3] Humanitas Clin & Res Ctr, Business Operat Off, Milan, Italy
[4] Humanitas Univ, Dept Biomed Sci, Milan, Italy
[5] Casa Sollievo Sofferenza Hosp, IRCCS, Urol, San Giovanni Rotondo, FG, Italy
来源
EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS | 2020年 / 6卷 / 02期
关键词
R; obot assisted radical prostatectomy; Prostate cancer; Vesicouretrhal anastomosis; Posterior reconstruction; Urinary continence; Functional outcomes; URINARY CONTINENCE; EAU GUIDELINES; COMPLICATIONS; OUTCOMES; METAANALYSIS; ANASTOMOSIS; RECOVERY; CANCER; COST;
D O I
10.1016/j.euf.2018.10.013
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: The adoption of robotic technology in the treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) could lead to improvement in outcomes. Objective: To evaluate feasibility, to compare functional outcomes, and to assess the economic benefits of removing catheter on the postoperative day (POD) 3 versus POD 5 after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP). Design, setting, and participants: From September 2016 to May 2017, patients selected to undergo RARP for clinically localized PCa at a high-volume center were prospectively randomized into group 1 (POD 3; n = 72) versus group 2 (POD 5, n = 74). Intervention: All patients underwent RARP with anatomical posterior and anterior reconstruction. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary endpoint was to compare acute urinary retention (AUR) and urinary leakage rate in the two groups. The secondary endpoints were early and mid-term postoperative functional outcomes assessed through questionnaires (ICIQ-MLUTS, IPSS), early continence rate, and postoperative pain/discomfort (visual analog scale score). The economic impact of early catheter removal was also assessed. Results and limitations: AUR was reported in two (1.4%) cases, one for each study group (p = 0.9). One case of vesicourethral leakage was reported (0.7%) in group 1. Urethral discomfort and pain at discharge was significantly higher in group 2 (p = 0.03). In our clinical practice, POD 3 catheter removal approach would determine a saving of approximately (sic)80 000 and 405 d of hospitalization yearly. The main limitation is the small sample size. Conclusions: Early catheter removal after RARP does not lead to an increase in perioperative complications. No negative effect on early and mid-term functional outcomes was observed. A significant impact on saving economic resources was reported. Patient summary: We demonstrated that early catheter removal has no negative effect on spontaneous voiding, complications, or urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. (C) 2018 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:259 / 266
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Factors Affecting Return of Continence 3 Months After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Analysis From a Large, Prospective Data by a Single Surgeon
    Ko, Young Hwii
    Coelho, Rafael F.
    Chauhan, Sanket
    Sivaraman, Ananthakrishnan
    Schatloff, Oscar
    Cheon, Jun
    Patel, Vipul R.
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2012, 187 (01) : 190 - 194
  • [42] A prospective, non-randomized trial comparing robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy in one European institution
    Ficarra, Vincenzo
    Novara, Giacomo
    Fracalanza, Simonetta
    D'Elia, Carolina
    Secco, Silvia
    Iafrate, Massimo
    Cavalleri, Stefano
    Artibani, Walter
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2009, 104 (04) : 534 - 539
  • [43] Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs laparoscopic and open retropubic radical prostatectomy: functional outcomes 18 months after diagnosis from a national cohort study in England
    Nossiter, Julie
    Sujenthiran, Arunan
    Charman, Susan C.
    Cathcart, Paul J.
    Aggarwal, Ajay
    Payne, Heather
    Clarke, Noel W.
    van der Meulen, Jan
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2018, 118 (04) : 489 - 494
  • [44] Standard vs delayed ligature of the dorsal vascular complex during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: results from a randomized controlled trial
    Antonelli, Alessandro
    Palumbo, Carlotta
    Veccia, Alessandro
    Fisogni, Simona
    Zamboni, Stefania
    Furlan, Maria
    Francavilla, Simone
    Lattarulo, Marco
    De Marzo, Enrico
    Mirabella, Giuseppe
    Peroni, Angelo
    Simeone, Claudio
    JOURNAL OF ROBOTIC SURGERY, 2019, 13 (02) : 253 - 260
  • [45] Five-year Outcomes for a Prospective Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Laparoscopic and Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy
    Porpiglia, Francesco
    Fiori, Cristian
    Bertolo, Riccardo
    Manfredi, Matteo
    Mele, Fabrizio
    Checcucci, Enrico
    De Luca, Stefano
    Passera, Roberto
    Scarpa, Roberto Mario
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS, 2018, 4 (01): : 80 - 86
  • [46] Pelvic Anatomy on Preoperative Magnetic Resonance Imaging Can Predict Early Continence After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
    Mendoza, Pierre J.
    Stern, Joshua M.
    Li, Amy Y.
    Jaffe, William
    Kovell, Robert
    Nguyen, Mary
    Natale, Rachel
    Monahan, Kelly
    Bergey, Meredith R.
    Lee, David I.
    JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2011, 25 (01) : 51 - 55
  • [47] Low Pressure Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy With the AirSeal System at OLV Hospital: Results From a Prospective Study
    La Falce, Sabrina
    Novara, Giacomo
    Gandaglia, Giorgio
    Umari, Paolo
    De Naeyer, Geert
    D'Hondt, Frederiek
    Beresian, Jean
    Carette, Rik
    Penicka, Martin
    Mo, Yujiing
    Vandenbroucke, Geert
    Mottrie, Alexandre
    CLINICAL GENITOURINARY CANCER, 2017, 15 (06) : E1029 - E1037
  • [48] Is Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy effective in early continence? A single-center experience of the first 50 patients
    Yilmaz, Kayhan
    Ozsoy, Cagatay
    Olcucu, Mahmut Taha
    Aksaray, Eren Erdi
    Okuducu, Yahya
    Ates, Mutlu
    TURKISH JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2021, 47 (02): : 125 - 130
  • [49] Elderly Patients' Outcomes After Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Single Center Experience
    Islamoglu, Ekrem
    Aksaray, Eren Erdi
    Tas, Selim
    Ari, Ozgur
    Boga, Mehmet Salih
    Ates, Mutlu
    Savas, Murat
    JOURNAL OF LAPAROENDOSCOPIC & ADVANCED SURGICAL TECHNIQUES, 2023, 33 (11): : 1097 - 1101
  • [50] Return to Work and Normal Daily Life Activity after Open and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy - A Single Surgeon Analysis
    Bier, Simone
    Hennenlotter, Joerg
    Rausch, Steffen
    Aufderklamm, Stefan
    Martzog, Johannes C.
    Stenzl, Arnulf
    Schwentner, Christian
    Todenhoefer, Tilman
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2016, 96 (03) : 280 - 286