Safety and Clinical Outcomes of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy in Kidney Transplant Patients: A Systematic Review

被引:11
|
作者
Zeng, Jiping [1 ]
Christiansen, Andrew [2 ]
Pooli, Aydin [3 ]
Qiu, Fang [4 ]
LaGrange, Chad A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Nebraska Med Ctr, Coll Med, Omaha, NE 68198 USA
[2] Univ Nebraska Med Ctr, Div Urol, Omaha, NE 68198 USA
[3] Univ Calif Los Angeles, David Geffen Sch Med, Dept Urol, Los Angeles, CA 90095 USA
[4] Univ Nebraska Med Ctr, Dept Biostat, Coll Publ Hlth, Omaha, NE 68198 USA
关键词
robot-assisted radical prostatectomy; kidney transplant; prostate cancer; POSITIVE SURGICAL MARGINS; RENAL-TRANSPLANTATION; MYCOPHENOLATE-MOFETIL; PROSTATIC-CARCINOMA; 1ST EXPERIENCE; RECIPIENTS; CANCER; RISK; MALIGNANCIES; METAANALYSIS;
D O I
10.1089/end.2018.0394
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
Objective: To evaluate the safety and outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in renal transplant recipients (RTRs) based on available literature. Materials and Methods: A literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science through robot AND prostatectomy AND transplant. Three authors separately reviewed the records to select the relevant articles with any discrepancies solved by open discussion. Patient age, prostate-specific antigen, Gleason score, and tumor stage were recorded as well as intraoperative and postoperative complications, length of stay, surgical margin status, and disease recurrence, if provided. The operative techniques and modification/adjustments to standard port placements were also reviewed. We also include our case report in this review. Results: We retrieved 10 articles reporting clinical data on RARP for kidney transplant patients, including 5 case series (level 4) and 5 case reports (level 4). A total of 35 kidney transplant recipients undergoing RARP were analyzed in this systematic review, one case in our institution included. None of the cases had major technical difficulties precluding the operation. Technical modifications to the standard technique were described in 10 of the 11 articles specifically including modifications to port placement (54% of patients), development of the space of Retzius (60% of patients), and performance of lymphadenectomy. Mean operative time was 220 minutes. Perioperative complication rate was 17.1% (6 of 35 patients), with only one Clavien III or greater complication. The rate of positive surgical margins was found to be 31.4%. Data on biochemical recurrence revealed a combined rate of 18.1%. Conclusions: RARP is technically feasible for treating localized prostate cancer in RTRs. Graft function did not deteriorate in any patient. Modifications to the standard technique should be considered specifically for port placement, development of the space of Retzius, and performance of lymphadenectomy. Oncologic outcomes remain difficult to interpret given the small number of reported cases.
引用
收藏
页码:935 / 943
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Potency outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Sophie J. Tissot
    Anthony J. Costello
    Nature Reviews Urology, 2022, 19 : 195 - 196
  • [22] Robot-Assisted radical Prostatectomy
    Wagner, Christian
    Addali, Mustapha
    Witt, Joern H.
    AKTUELLE UROLOGIE, 2020, 51 (05) : 483 - 497
  • [23] RETZIUS-SPARING ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY IN RENAL TRANSPLANT PATIENTS
    Yee, Chi Hang
    Tam, Mandy Ho-Man
    Chan, Yun-Sang
    Chan, Chi-Kwok
    Lo, Ka-Lun
    Chan, Wilson Hoi-Chak
    Teoh, Jeremy Yuen-Chun
    Chiu, Peter Ka-Fung
    Ng, Chi-Fai
    JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2024, 211 (05): : E638 - E638
  • [24] ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Hosseini, Abolfazl
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2014, 21 : A37 - A37
  • [25] Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Perioperative Outcomes and Complications After Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy
    Novara, Giacomo
    Ficarra, Vincenzo
    Rosen, Raymond C.
    Artibani, Walter
    Costello, Anthony
    Eastham, James A.
    Graefen, Markus
    Guazzoni, Giorgio
    Shariat, Shahrokh F.
    Stolzenburg, Jens-Uwe
    Van Poppel, Hendrik
    Zattoni, Filiberto
    Montorsi, Francesco
    Mottrie, Alexandre
    Wilson, Timothy G.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2012, 62 (03) : 431 - 452
  • [26] Management of erectile dysfunction following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review
    Marchioni, Michele
    De Francesco, Piergustavo
    Castellucci, Roberto
    Papalia, Rocco
    Sarikaya, Selcuk
    Gomez Rivas, Juan
    Schips, Luigi
    Scarpa, Roberto M.
    Esperto, Francesco
    MINERVA UROLOGICA E NEFROLOGICA, 2020, 72 (05) : 543 - 554
  • [27] Aspirin use in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? Systematic review and metanalysis.
    Carneiro, Arie
    Cha, Jonathan Doyun
    Wroclawski, Marcelo Langer
    Kayano, Paulo Priante
    Claros, Oliver Rojas
    Moran, Natasha Kouvaleski Saviano
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2017, 35 (06)
  • [28] A review of technical progression in the robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Cho, Eric Y.
    Yang, Kevin K.
    Lee, Ziho
    Eun, Daniel D.
    TRANSLATIONAL ANDROLOGY AND UROLOGY, 2021, 10 (05) : 2171 - 2177
  • [29] Perioperative outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs. open radical prostatectomy
    Trinh, Q. D.
    Sammon, J.
    Ghani, K. R.
    Jeong, W.
    Jhaveri, J.
    Sukumar, S.
    Dabaja, A.
    Friedman, A.
    Ehlert, M.
    Muhletaler, F.
    Agarwal, P. K.
    Rogers, C. G.
    Peabody, J. O.
    Menon, M.
    EUROPEAN UROLOGY SUPPLEMENTS, 2012, 11 (01) : E679 - U450
  • [30] Comparison of oncological and functional outcomes of perineoscopic radical prostatectomy and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy
    Arikan, Yusuf
    Eksi, Mithat
    Tasci, Ali Ihsan
    UPDATES IN SURGERY, 2023, 75 (04) : 1027 - 1035