Role of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in locally advanced prostate cancer

Locally advanced prostate cancer is regarded as a very high‐risk disease with a poor prognosis. Although there is no definitive consensus on the definition of locally advanced prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer as a primary treatment or part of a multimodal therapy has been reported. Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy is currently carried out even in high‐risk prostate cancer because it provides optimal outcomes. However, limited studies have assessed the role of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in patients with locally advanced prostate cancer. Herein, we summarize and review the current knowledge in terms of the definition and surgical indications of locally advanced prostate cancer, and the surgical procedure and perisurgical/oncological outcomes of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymphadenectomy for locally advanced prostate cancer.     

Predictors of prolonged operative time during robot‐assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Study Type – Therapy (case series)
Level of Evidence 4 What’s known on the subject? and What does the study add? Robotic prostatectomy has now become the most common surgical approach in the United States for patients with prostate cancer. There is a significant learning curve for this procedure and this paper attempts to help understand what factors will make the operative times longer. Very little to date has been written on this topic.

OBJECTIVE

To determine risk factors for prolonged operative time (OT) during robot‐assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). Being able to predict prolonged OT is of pivotal importance both to the physician for patient counseling and to the hospital management.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective review of patient records undergoing RALP between 2003 and 2009 at a tertiary academic center with a structured teaching program. The following variables were recorded: age, race, body‐mass index (BMI), previous abdominal surgery (yes/no), nerve‐sparing technique (yes/no), lymph nodes dissection (yes/no), pathological stage (organ‐confined versus non), cumulative surgical experience with RALP (expressed as number of years since introduction of RALP at our center), prostate weight and OT calculated skin‐to‐skin by the anesthesiologists. Prolonged OT was defined as the upper quintile (20%) according to the distribution. Multivariate regression model was generated to assess potential predictors of prolonged OT.

RESULTS

A total of 523 records were retrieved. Caucasians accounted for 77.8% of the cohort. Median age was 60.3 years (interquartile range, IQR, 55.0–64.6 years), median BMI 28.1 (25.8–30.7 kg/m²), prostate weight 46.0 g (37.0–57.8 g). Eighty‐six (16.4%) patients had previous abdominal surgery, lymph nodes dissection was performed in 341 (65.2%) and nerve‐sparing technique was done in 310 (59.3%) cases. Median OT was 175 min (IQR 146–220 min). Prolonged OT was set at >230 min, thereby 105 (20.1%) records were classified as such. On multivariate analysis, cumulative surgical experience with RALP (P < 0.001), nerve sparing (P= 0.023) and prostate weight (P < 0.001) were independent predictors of prolonged OT.

CONCLUSIONS

Larger prostates are associated with longer OT and this effect is maintained independently of cumulative robotic experience that represents another independent factor in determining OT.     

Interval from prostate biopsy to robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy: effects on perioperative outcomes

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether shorter intervals (<4 and 6 weeks) between prostate biopsy and robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) have a detrimental effect on perioperative outcomes, as recent studies showed that open RP shortly after prostate biopsy does not adversely influence surgical difficulty or efficacy, but RARP relies solely on visual cues rather than tactile sensation to determine posterior surgical planes of dissection.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A series of 559 patients undergoing RARP from March 2004 to July 2007 was retrospectively reviewed. The interval between prostate biopsy and RARP was determined and patients with intervals of ≤4 weeks were compared to those >4 weeks. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analysed to determine statistically significant differences between the groups. This comparison was then repeated with a ≤6‐ vs >6‐week interval, and examined with a multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

In the ≤4‐week group (27 patients) vs the >4‐week group (509 patients), there was a significantly (P < 0.05) higher rate of complications (18.5% vs 6.9%). In the ≤6‐week group (81 patients) vs the >6‐week group (455 patients) there was a smaller but still significantly higher rate of complications (13.6% vs 6.4%). These results were still significant when controlling for patient and disease characteristics and the ‘learning curve’. There was also a significantly higher rate of transfusion in the ≤6‐week group (3.7%) than the >6‐week group (0.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that RARP should be delayed after prostate biopsy; RARP within 6 weeks of biopsy was associated with a greater risk of complications even when controlling for disease and patient characteristics.     

Pathological findings and prostate‐specific antigen outcomes after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for high‐risk prostate cancer

Study Type – Therapy (case series)
Level of Evidence 4

OBJECTIVE

To review the biochemical recurrence‐free survival (RFS) rates of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in patients with a high risk of disease progression as defined by preoperative criteria of D’Amico et al.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between October 2000 and May 2008, 110 patients had extraperitoneal LRP and bilateral pelvic lymph node sampling for high‐risk prostate cancer in our department. High‐risk prostate cancer was defined as a prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) level of >20 ng/mL, and/or a biopsy Gleason score ≥8, and/or a clinical stage of T2c–T4 stage. The median follow‐up was 37.6 months. Risk factors for time to biochemical recurrence were tested using log‐rank survivorship analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Prostate cancer was organ‐confined in 36% of patients; the Overall RFS was 79.4% and 69.8% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. The 3‐year RFS rates for organ‐confined cancer vs extracapsular extension were 100% and 54.3%, respectively (P < 0.001). The 3‐year RFS rates for tumour‐free seminal vesicle vs seminal vesicle invasion were 81.8% and 33.6%, respectively (P < 0.001). The 3‐year RFS rates for negative surgical margins vs positive were 85.2% and 47.3%, respectively (P = 0.001). Compared with men with any single pathological risk factor or any two risk factors, men with all three risk factors had a significantly shorter time to PSA failure after LRP (log‐rank test, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Among patients at increased risk of disease progression as defined by preoperative criteria, a third of men with organ‐confined disease have a favourable prognosis. Men at high risk for early PSA failure could be better identified by pathological assessment of RP specimens, and selected for phase III randomized trials investigating adjuvant systemic treatment.     

Adequacy of lymphadenectomy among men undergoing robot‐assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

Study Type – Therapy (case series)
Level of Evidence 4

OBJECTIVE

To compare rates of lymph node dissection (LND) and nodal yields between patients treated with open radical retropubic prostatectomy (ORRP) and robot‐assisted RRP (RARP) in a contemporary single‐institution series.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from 1278 consecutive patients (716 ORRP and 562 RARP) from one institution were accrued prospectively in an institutional database, and the data analysed retrospectively. Disease risk was assessed using the Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) score. The likelihood of LND, nodal yield, and likelihood of node positivity were compared between ORRP and RARP.

RESULTS

Of patients treated with ORRP and RARP, 47.8% and 31.8% had LND, respectively, with more receiving LND over time in both surgical approaches. Men undergoing LND had a higher disease risk than those not undergoing LND (mean CAPRA score 4.3 vs 2.1, P < 0.01), and there was no difference in risk between those undergoing ORRP or RARP (mean CAPRA score 3.0 vs 2.9, P = 0.29). The mean (sd ) nodal yield was 14.4 (8.7) for ORRP and 9.3 (5.4) for RARP (P < 0.01). Among patients undergoing LND, 5.8% of ORRP and 4.1% of RARP patients had positive nodes (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The indications for LND and template dissection should be the same regardless of surgical approach. The nodal yield was adequate using both approaches; the yield was higher among ORRP than RARP patients, but the difference was not large, and is less remarkable than the wide variation in yield within each approach. Several factors might explain this variation.     

Comparison of Gleason grade and score between preoperative biopsy and prostatectomy specimens in prostate cancer

AIM: Although the histopathological findings obtained from biopsy specimens are important for choosing the appropriate management of prostate cancer, there have been some discrepancies in Gleason grade and consequently, score between biopsy and surgical specimens. A comparison of findings between these two kinds of specimens was performed. METHODS: Radical prostatectomy was performed at Asahi General Hospital on 223 cases of T1b-T3 without previous cancer treatment, and the Gleason grade and score of the biopsy and surgical specimens were compared. RESULTS: A 37% coincidence in Gleason score was obtained between biopsy and surgical specimens; coincidence including one digit difference in score was approximately 70%. Upgrading was more than downgrading. Disagreement in secondary grade was greater than that in primary grade. Disagreement in Gleason score was roughly similar among different score items and was not influenced by level of prostate-specific antigen, however, the small volume of the cancer tissues more affected the discrepancy in score. CONCLUSION: The use of biopsy findings is required to be taken into account regarding the discrepancy.     

Tumour length of the largest focus predicts prostate‐specific antigen‐based recurrence after radical prostatectomy in clinically localized prostate cancer

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the possible significance of tumour dimensional variables, including maximum tumour diameter (MTD), maximum tumour area (MTA) and total tumour volume (TTV), with standard prognostic factors for predicting prostate‐specific antigen (PSA) recurrence after radical prostatectomy (RP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Serial whole sections of the prostate from 164 patients who had RP for localized prostate cancer were investigated. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used for univariate and multivariate analyses to test the relationships between biochemical failure and clinicopathological factors, including tumour dimensional variables. The results were analysed retrospectively to develop a prognostic factor‐based model for risk stratification.

RESULTS

In the univariate Cox proportional hazard model, pathological T stage, Gleason score, perineural invasion, microvascular invasion, positive surgical margins, MTD, MTA and TTV were significantly associated with biochemical failure. In the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model using a stepwise inclusion of these factors, Gleason score, positive surgical margins and MTD were independent indices in association with biochemical failure. Using the three statistically significant variables, the relative risk of biochemical failure could be calculated.

CONCLUSION

These results imply that MTD is possibly one of the most important prognostic factors for predicting biochemical recurrence after RP. As calculating the MTD on the section a rapid, simple and objective method, it can be used instead of the TTV calculation. The prognostic factor‐ based risk stratification might help clinicians to predict biochemical failure after RP.