Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in an initial Japanese series: The impact of prior abdominal surgery on surgical outcomes

• Published in: International journal of urology 2015-03, Vol.22 (3), p.278-282
• Main Authors: Yumioka, Tetsuya, Iwamoto, Hideto, Masago, Toshihiko, Morizane, Shuichi, Yao, Akihisa, Honda, Masashi, Muraoka, Kuniyasu, Sejima, Takehiro, Takenaka, Atsushi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abdomen - surgery; Aged; Humans; Intraoperative Complications; Japan; Laparoscopy - methods; lysis of adhesions; Male; Middle Aged; operation outcome; Operative Time; prior abdominal surgery; Prostate - surgery; prostate cancer; Prostatectomy - methods; Prostatic Neoplasms - surgery; Retrospective Studies; robot-assisted radical prostatectomy; Robotic Surgical Procedures - methods; Surgical Instruments
• ISSN: 0919-8172; 1442-2042
• DOI: 10.1111/iju.12678

Objectives To evaluate the influence of prior abdominal surgery on surgical outcomes of robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy in an early single center experience in Japan. Methods We reviewed medical records of patients with localized prostate cancer who underwent robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy from October 2010 to September 2013 at Tottori University Faculty of Medicine, Yonago, Tottori, Japan. Patients with prior abdominal surgery were compared with those with no prior surgery with respect to total operative time, port‐insertion time, console time, positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rate. Furthermore, the number of patients requiring minimal adhesion lysis was compared between the two groups. Results Of 150 patients who underwent robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy, 94 (63%) had no prior abdominal surgery, whereas 56 patients (37%) did. The mean total operative time was 329 and 333 min (P = 0.340), mean port insertion time was 40 and 34.5 min (P = 0.003), mean console time was 255 and 238 min (P = 0.145), a positive surgical margin was observed in 17.9% and 17.0% patients (P = 0.896), and the incidence of perioperative complications was 25% and 23.4% (P = 0.825), respectively, in those with and without prior abdominal surgery. In the prior abdominal surgery group, 48 patients (80.4%) required adhesion lysis at the time of trocar placement or while operating the robotic console. Conclusion Robot‐assisted radical prostatectomy appears to be a safe approach for patients with prior abdominal surgery without increasing total operative time, robotic console time, positive surgical margin or the incidence of perioperative complications.