Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2021 Nov;206(5):1184-1191.
doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001939. Epub 2021 Jun 28.

Comparative Outcomes of Salvage Retzius-Sparing versus Standard Robotic Prostatectomy: An International, Multi-Surgeon Series

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparative Outcomes of Salvage Retzius-Sparing versus Standard Robotic Prostatectomy: An International, Multi-Surgeon Series

Keith J Kowalczyk et al. J Urol. 2021 Nov.

Abstract

Purpose: Salvage radical prostatectomy is rare due to the risk of postoperative complications. We compare salvage Retzius-sparing robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (SRS-RARP) with salvage standard robotic assisted radical prostatectomy (SS-RARP).

Materials and methods: A total of 72 patients across 9 centers were identified (40 SRS-RARP vs 32 SS-RARP). Demographics, perioperative data, and pathological and functional outcomes were compared using Student's t-test and ANOVA. Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to assess risk of incontinence and time to continence. Linear regression models were constructed to investigate postoperative pad use and console time.

Results: Median followup was 23 vs 36 months for SRS-RARP vs SS-RARP. Console time and estimated blood loss favored SRS-RARP. There were no differences in complication rates or oncologic outcomes. SRS-RARP had improved continence (78.4% vs 43.8%, p <0.001 for 0-1 pad, 54.1% vs 6.3%, p <0.001 for 0 pad), lower pads per day (0.57 vs 2.03, p <0.001), and earlier return to continence (median 47 vs 180 days, p=0.008). SRS-RARP was associated with decreased incontinence defined as >0-1 pad (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10-0.79, p=0.016), although not when defined as >0 pad (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31-1.01, p=0.053). On adjusted analysis SRS-RARP was associated with decreased pads per day. Lymph node dissection and primary treatment with stereotactic body radiation therapy were associated with longer console time.

Conclusions: SRS-RARP is a feasible salvage option with significantly improved urinary function outcomes. This may warrant increased utilization of SRS-RARP to manage men who fail nonsurgical primary treatment for prostate cancer.

Keywords: neoplasm recurrence, local; prostatectomy; prostatic neoplasms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Editorial Comment.
    Marra G. Marra G. J Urol. 2021 Nov;206(5):1191. doi: 10.1097/JU.0000000000001939.01. Epub 2021 Aug 12. J Urol. 2021. PMID: 34382856 No abstract available.

Publication types

MeSH terms