Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Intraoperative Evaluation and Management of High-Risk Prostate Cancer during Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Robotic Urologic Surgery

  • 939 Accesses

Abstract

High-risk localized disease accounts for approximately 20–35% of newly diagnosed disease, and a number of risk stratification systems are available. After risk stratification and metastatic staging, patients are more often referred for treatment as opposed to active surveillance. There are a number of decision points important for surgical management, if selected, including the timing of surgery, further staging with MRI, discussion of extended pelvic lymph node dissection, nerve-sparing choices, and emerging concepts such as retzius-sparing approaches. We conclude with a review of oncologic and functional results specific to high-risk disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Cooperberg MR, Cowan J, Broering JM, Carroll PR. High-risk prostate cancer in the United States, 1990-2007. World J Urol. 2008 Jun;26(3):211–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-008-0250-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Shao YH, Demissie K, Shih W, Mehta AR, Stein MN, Roberts CB, Dipaola RS, Lu-Yao GL. Contemporary risk profile of prostate cancer in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Sep 16;101(18):1280–3. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djp262.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lowrance WT, Elkin EB, Yee DS, Feifer A, Ehdaie B, Jacks LM, Atoria CL, Zelefsky MJ, Scher HI, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Locally advanced prostate cancer: a population-based study of treatment patterns. BJU Int. 2012 May;109(9):1309–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10760.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sanda MG, Cadeddu JA, Kirkby E, Chen RC, Crispino T, Fontanarosa J, Freedland SJ, Greene K, Klotz LH, Makarov DV, Nelson JB, Rodrigues G, Sandler HM, Taplin ME, Treadwell JR. Clinically localized prostate cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO guideline. Part I: risk stratification, shared decision making, and care options. J Urol. 2018 Mar;199(3):683–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2017.11.095.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Mottet N, van den Bergh RCN, Briers E, Van den Broeck T, Cumberbatch MG, De Santis M, et al. EAU-EANM-ESTRO-ESUR-SIOG guidelines on prostate Cancer-2020 update. Part 1: screening, diagnosis, and local treatment with curative intent. Eur Urol. 2021 Feb;79(2):243–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.09.042.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wilt TJ, Brawer MK, Jones KM, Barry MJ, Aronson WJ, Fox S, Gingrich JR, Wei JT, Gilhooly P, Grob BM, Nsouli I, Iyer P, Cartagena R, Snider G, Roehrborn C, Sharifi R, Blank W, Pandya P, Andriole GL, Culkin D, Wheeler T. Prostate cancer intervention versus observation trial (PIVOT) study group. Radical prostatectomy versus observation for localized prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2012 Jul 19;367(3):203–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Bill-Axelson A, Holmberg L, Ruutu M, Garmo H, Stark JR, Busch C, Nordling S, Häggman M, Andersson SO, Bratell S, Spångberg A, Palmgren J, Steineck G, Adami HO, Johansson JE. SPCG-4 investigators. Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in early prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011 May 5;364(18):1708–17. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1011967.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML. Mayo Clinic validation of the D’Amico risk group classification for predicting survival following radical prostatectomy. J Urol 2008 Apr;179(4):1354–1360; discussion 1360-1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2007.11.061.

  9. D’Amico AV, Whittington R, Malkowicz SB, Schultz D, Blank K, Broderick GA, Tomaszewski JE, Renshaw AA, Kaplan I, Beard CJ, Wein A. Biochemical outcome after radical prostatectomy, external beam radiation therapy, or interstitial radiation therapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. JAMA. 1998 Sep 16;280(11):969–74. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.280.11.969.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wang Z, Ni Y, Chen J, Sun G, Zhang X, Zhao J, Zhu X, Zhang H, Zhu S, Dai J, Shen P, Zeng H. The efficacy and safety of radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy in high-risk prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. World J Surg Oncol. 2020 Feb 24;18(1):42. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-020-01824-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mohler JL, Antonarakis ES, Armstrong AJ, D’Amico AV, Davis BJ, Dorff T, Eastham JA, Enke CA, Farrington TA, Higano CS, Horwitz EM, Hurwitz M, Ippolito JE, Kane CJ, Kuettel MR, Lang JM, McKenney J, Netto G, Penson DF, Plimack ER, Pow-Sang JM, Pugh TJ, Richey S, Roach M, Rosenfeld S, Schaeffer E, Shabsigh A, Small EJ, Spratt DE, Srinivas S, Tward J, Shead DA, Freedman-Cass DA. Prostate cancer, version 2.2019, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2019 May 1;17(5):479–505. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2019.0023.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Saika T, Miura N, Fukumoto T, Yanagihara Y, Miyauchi Y, Kikugawa T. Role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in locally advanced prostate cancer. Int J Urol. 2018 Jan;25(1):30–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/iju.13441.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Gandaglia G, De Lorenzis E, Novara G, Fossati N, De Groote R, Dovey Z, Suardi N, Montorsi F, Briganti A, Rocco B, Mottrie A. Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in patients with locally-advanced prostate cancer. Eur Urol. 2017 Feb;71(2):249–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.05.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Abdollah F, Sood A, Sammon JD, Hsu L, Beyer B, Moschini M, Gandaglia G, Rogers CG, Haese A, Montorsi F, Graefen M, Briganti A, Menon M. Long-term cancer control outcomes in patients with clinically high-risk prostate cancer treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: results from a multi-institutional study of 1100 patients. Eur Urol. 2015 Sep;68(3):497–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2015.06.020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gandaglia G, Abdollah F, Hu J, Kim S, Briganti A, Sammon JD, Becker A, Roghmann F, Graefen M, Montorsi F, Perrotte P, Karakiewicz PI, Trinh QD, Sun M. Is robot-assisted radical prostatectomy safe in men with high-risk prostate cancer? Assessment of perioperative outcomes, positive surgical margins, and use of additional cancer treatments. J Endourol. 2014 Jul;28(7):784–91. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2013.0774.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Suardi N, Dell’Oglio P, Gallina A, Gandaglia G, Buffi N, Moschini M, Fossati N, Lughezzani G, Karakiewicz PI, Freschi M, Lucianò R, Shariat SF, Guazzoni G, Gaboardi F, Montorsi F, Briganti A. Evaluation of positive surgical margins in patients undergoing robot-assisted and open radical prostatectomy according to preoperative risk groups. Urol Oncol. 2016 Feb;34(2):57.e1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2015.08.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Parker CC, Clarke NW, Cook AD, Kynaston HG, Petersen PM, Catton C, Cross W, Logue J, Parulekar W, Payne H, Persad R, Pickering H, Saad F, Anderson J, Bahl A, Bottomley D, Brasso K, Chahal R, Cooke PW, Eddy B, Gibbs S, Goh C, Gujral S, Heath C, Henderson A, Jaganathan R, Jakobsen H, James ND, Kanaga Sundaram S, Lees K, Lester J, Lindberg H, Money-Kyrle J, Morris S, O’Sullivan J, Ostler P, Owen L, Patel P, Pope A, Popert R, Raman R, Røder MA, Sayers I, Simms M, Wilson J, Zarkar A, Parmar MKB, Sydes MR. Timing of radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy (RADICALS-RT): a randomised, controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet. 2020 Oct 31;396(10260):1413–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31553-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Srougi V, Tourinho-Barbosa RR, Nunes-Silva I, Baghdadi M, Garcia-Barreras S, Rembeyo G, Eiffel SS, Barret E, Rozet F, Galiano M, Sanchez-Salas R, Cathelineau X. The role of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer. J Endourol. 2017 Mar;31(3):229–37. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2016.0659.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Chade DC, Eastham J, Graefen M, Hu JC, Karnes RJ, Klotz L, Montorsi F, van Poppel H, Scardino PT, Shariat SF. Cancer control and functional outcomes of salvage radical prostatectomy for radiation-recurrent prostate cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Eur Urol. 2012 May;61(5):961–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.01.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Connolly SS, Cathcart PJ, Gilmore P, Kerger M, Crowe H, Peters JS, Murphy DG, Costello AJ. Robotic radical prostatectomy as the initial step in multimodal therapy for men with high-risk localised prostate cancer: initial experience of 160 men. BJU Int. 2012 Mar;109(5):752–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2011.10548.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Casey JT, Meeks JJ, Greco KA, Wu SD, Nadler RB. Outcomes of locally advanced (T3 or greater) prostate cancer in men undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2009 Sep;23(9):1519–22. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2009.0388.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lavery HJ, Nabizada-Pace F, Carlucci JR, Brajtbord JS, Samadi DB. Nerve-sparing robotic prostatectomy in preoperatively high-risk patients is safe and efficacious. Urol Oncol. 2012 Jan-Feb;30(1):26–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2009.11.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Xylinas E, Daché A, Rouprêt M. Is radical prostatectomy a viable therapeutic option in clinically locally advanced (cT3) prostate cancer? BJU Int. 2010 Dec;106(11):1596–600. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2010.09630.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mitchell CR, Boorjian SA, Umbreit EC, Rangel LJ, Carlson RE, Karnes RJ. 20-year survival after radical prostatectomy as initial treatment for cT3 prostate cancer. BJU Int. 2012 Dec;110(11):1709–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11372.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Greenberger BA, Zaorsky NG, Den RB. Comparison of radical prostatectomy versus radiation and androgen deprivation therapy strategies as primary treatment for high-risk localized prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Focus. 2020 Mar 15;6(2):404–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2019.11.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Engl T, Mandel P, Hoeh B, Preisser F, Wenzel M, Humke C, Welte M, Köllermann J, Wild P, Deuker M, Kluth LA, Roos FC, Chun FKH, Becker A. Impact of “time-from-biopsy-to-prostatectomy” on adverse oncological results in patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer. Front Surg. 2020 Sep 25;7:561853. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2020.561853.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Zanaty M, Alnazari M, Ajib K, Lawson K, Azizi M, Rajih E, Alenizi A, Hueber PA, Tolmier C, Meskawi M, Saad F, Pompe RS, Karakiewicz PI, El-Hakim A, Zorn KC. Does surgical delay for radical prostatectomy affect biochemical recurrence? A retrospective analysis from a Canadian cohort. World J Urol. 2018 Jan;36(1):1–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2105-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham AP, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Emberton M. PROMIS study group. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, Briganti A, Budäus L, Hellawell G, Hindley RG, Roobol MJ, Eggener S, Ghei M, Villers A, Bladou F, Villeirs GM, Virdi J, Boxler S, Robert G, Singh PB, Venderink W, Hadaschik BA, Ruffion A, Hu JC, Margolis D, Crouzet S, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Pinto P, Gill I, Allen C, Giganti F, Freeman A, Morris S, Punwani S, Williams NR, Brew-Graves C, Deeks J, Takwoingi Y, Emberton M, Moore CM. PRECISION study group collaborators. MRI-targeted or standard biopsy for prostate-cancer diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767–77. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1801993.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Boorjian SA, Karnes RJ, Crispen PL, Carlson RE, Rangel LJ, Bergstralh EJ, Blute ML. The impact of positive surgical margins on mortality following radical prostatectomy during the prostate specific antigen era. J Urol. 2010 Mar;183(3):1003–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2009.11.039.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Pfitzenmaier J, Pahernik S, Tremmel T, Haferkamp A, Buse S, Hohenfellner M. Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: do they have an impact on biochemical or clinical progression? BJU Int. 2008 Nov;102(10):1413–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2008.07791.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. McClure TD, Margolis DJ, Reiter RE, et al. Use of MR imaging to determine preservation of the neurovascular bundles at robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Radiology. 2012;262(3):874–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hricak H, Wang L, Wei DC, et al. The role of preoperative endorectal magnetic resonance imaging in the decision regarding whether to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles during radical retropubic prostatectomy. Cancer. 2004;100(12):2655–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Masterson TA, Touijer K. The role of endorectal coil MRI in preoperative staging and decision-making for the treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer. MAGMA. 2008;21(6):371–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Park BH, Jeon HG, Jeong BC, Seo SI, Lee HM, Choi HY, Jeon SS. Influence of magnetic resonance imaging in the decision to preserve or resect neurovascular bundles at robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2014 Jul;192(1):82–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2014.01.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Baack Kukreja J, Bathala TK, Reichard CA, Troncoso P, Delacroix S, Davies B, Eggener S, Smaldone M, Minhaj Siddiqui M, Tollefson M, Chapin BF. Impact of preoperative prostate magnetic resonance imaging on the surgical management of high-risk prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2020 Mar;23(1):172–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41391-019-0171-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schiavina R, Bianchi L, Borghesi M, Dababneh H, Chessa F, Pultrone CV, Angiolini A, Gaudiano C, Porreca A, Fiorentino M, De Groote R, D’Hondt F, De Naeyer G, Mottrie A, Brunocilla E. MRI displays the prostatic cancer anatomy and improves the bundles management before robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Endourol. 2018 Apr;32(4):315–21. https://doi.org/10.1089/end.2017.0701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Reichard CA, Kukreja J, Gregg JR, Bathala TK, Achim MF, Wang X, Davis JW, Nguyen QN, Chapin BF. Prediction of organ-confined disease in high- and very-high-risk prostate cancer patients staged with magnetic resonance imaging: implications for clinical trial design. Eur Urol Focus. 2021 Jan;7(1):71–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euf.2019.04.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Abdollah F, Dalela D, Sood A, Sammon J, Cho R, Nocera L, Diaz M, Jeong W, Peabody JO, Fossati N, Gandaglia G, Briganti A, Montorsi F, Menon M. Functional outcomes of clinically high-risk prostate cancer patients treated with robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional analysis. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2017 Dec;20(4):395–400. https://doi.org/10.1038/pcan.2017.26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kumar A, Samavedi S, Bates AS, Mouraviev V, Coelho RF, Rocco B, Patel VR. Safety of selective nerve sparing in high risk prostate cancer during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. J Robot Surg. 2017 Jun;11(2):129–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-016-0627-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Canda AE. Re: is robot-assisted radical prostatectomy safe in men with high-risk prostate cancer? Assessment of perioperative outcomes, positive surgical margins, and use of additional cancer treatments. Eur Urol. 2015 Feb;67(2):347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2014.11.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Stroup SP, Kane CJ. Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy for high-risk prostate cancer: technical considerations and review of the literature. ISRN Urol. 2011;2011:201408. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/201408.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Canda AE, Balbay MD. Robotic radical prostatectomy in high-risk prostate cancer: current perspectives. Asian J Androl 2015 Nov-Dec;17(6):908–915; discussion 913. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.153541.

  44. Porpiglia F, Bertolo R, Checcucci E, Amparore D, Autorino R, Dasgupta P, Wiklund P, Tewari A, Liatsikos E, Fiori C. ESUT research group. Development and validation of 3D printed virtual models for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy and partial nephrectomy: urologists’ and patients’ perception. World J Urol. 2018 Feb;36(2):201–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-017-2126-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Mirmilstein G, Rai BP, Gbolahan O, Srirangam V, Narula A, Agarwal S, Lane TM, Vasdev N, Adshead J. The neurovascular structure-adjacent frozen-section examination (NeuroSAFE) approach to nerve sparing in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in a British setting - a prospective observational comparative study. BJU Int. 2018 Jun;121(6):854–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14078.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Vasdev N, Agarwal S, Rai BP, Soosainathan A, Shaw G, Chang S, Prasad V, Mohan-S G, Adshead JM. Intraoperative frozen section of the prostate reduces the risk of positive margin whilst ensuring nerve sparing in patients with intermediate and high-risk prostate cancer undergoing robotic radical prostatectomy: first reported UK series. Curr Urol. 2016 May;9(2):93–103. https://doi.org/10.1159/000442860.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Tewari AK, Patel ND, Leung RA, Yadav R, Vaughan ED, El-Douaihy Y, Tu JJ, Amin MB, Akhtar M, Burns M, Kreaden U, Rubin MA, Takenaka A, Shevchuk MM. Visual cues as a surrogate for tactile feedback during robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: posterolateral margin rates in 1340 consecutive patients. BJU Int. 2010 Aug;106(4):528–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.09176.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Yossepowitch O, Briganti A, Eastham JA, Epstein J, Graefen M, Montironi R, Touijer K. Positive surgical margins after radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and contemporary update. Eur Urol. 2014 Feb;65(2):303–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.07.039.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Punnen S, Meng MV, Cooperberg MR, Greene KL, Cowan JE, Carroll PR. How does robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) compare with open surgery in men with high-risk prostate cancer? BJU Int. 2013 Aug;112(4):E314–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11493.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Shikanov S, Woo J, Al-Ahmadie H, Katz MH, Zagaja GP, Shalhav AL, Zorn KC. Extrafascial versus interfascial nerve-sparing technique for robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy: comparison of functional outcomes and positive surgical margins characteristics. Urology. 2009 Sep;74(3):611–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2009.01.092.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Urkmez A, Ranasinghe W, Davis JW. Surgical techniques to improve continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Transl Androl Urol. 2020 Dec;9(6):3036–48. https://doi.org/10.21037/tau.2020.03.36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Checcucci E, Veccia A, Fiori C, Amparore D, Manfredi M, Di Dio M, Morra I, Galfano A, Autorino R, Bocciardi AM, Dasgupta P, Porpiglia F. Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs the standard approach: a systematic review and analysis of comparative outcomes. BJU Int. 2020 Jan;125(1):8–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14887.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Stonier T, Simson N, Davis J, Challacombe B. Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) vs standard RARP: it’s time for critical appraisal. BJU Int. 2019 Jan;123(1):5–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14468.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Nyarangi-Dix JN, Görtz M, Gradinarov G, Hofer L, Schütz V, Gasch C, Radtke JP, Hohenfellner M. Retzius-sparing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: functional and early oncologic results in aggressive and locally advanced prostate cancer. BMC Urol. 2019 Nov 12;19(1):113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12894-019-0550-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Perera M, Papa N, Roberts M, et al. Gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron emission tomography in advanced prostate cancer-updated diagnostic utility, sensitivity, specificity, and distribution of prostate-specific membrane antigen-avid lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol. 2020;77:403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Hofman MS, Lawrentschuk N, Francis RJ, et al. Prostate-specific membrane antigen PET-CT in patients with high-risk prostate cancer before curative-intent surgery or radiotherapy (proPSMA): a prospective, randomised, multicentre study. Lancet. 2020;395:1208.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Luiting HB, van Leeuwen PJ, Busstra MB, Brabander T, van der Poel HG, Donswijk ML, Vis AN, Emmett L, Stricker PD, Roobol MJ. Use of gallium-68 prostate-specific membrane antigen positron-emission tomography for detecting lymph node metastases in primary and recurrent prostate cancer and location of recurrence after radical prostatectomy: an overview of the current literature. BJU Int. 2020 Feb;125(2):206–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/bju.14944.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Fossati N, Willemse PM, Van den Broeck T, van den Bergh RCN, Yuan CY, Briers E, Bellmunt J, Bolla M, Cornford P, De Santis M, MacPepple E, Henry AM, Mason MD, Matveev VB, van der Poel HG, van der Kwast TH, Rouvière O, Schoots IG, Wiegel T, Lam TB, Mottet N, Joniau S. The benefits and harms of different extents of lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a systematic review. Eur Urol. 2017 Jul;72(1):84–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.12.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Lestingi JFP, Guglielmetti GB, Trinh QD, Coelho RF, Pontes J Jr, Bastos DA, Cordeiro MD, Sarkis AS, Faraj SF, Mitre AI, Srougi M, Nahas WC. Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during radical prostatectomy for intermediate- and high-risk prostate cancer: early oncological outcomes from a randomized phase 3 trial. Eur Urol 2020 Dec 5; S0302-2838(20)30941-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2020.11.040.

  60. Preisser F, van den Bergh RCN, Gandaglia G, Ost P, Surcel CI, Sooriakumaran P, Montorsi F, Graefen M, van der Poel H, de la Taille A, Briganti A, Salomon L, Ploussard G, Tilki D, EAU-YAUWP. Effect of extended pelvic lymph node dissection on oncologic outcomes in patients with D’Amico intermediate and high risk prostate cancer treated with radical prostatectomy: a multi-institutional study. J Urol. 2020 Feb;203(2):338–43. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000000504.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Silberstein JL, Su D, Glickman L, Kent M, Keren-Paz G, Vickers AJ, Coleman JA, Eastham JA, Scardino PT, Laudone VP. A case-mix-adjusted comparison of early oncological outcomes of open and robotic prostatectomy performed by experienced high volume surgeons. BJU Int. 2013 Feb;111(2):206–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2012.11638.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Xia L, Chen B, Jones A, Talwar R, Chelluri RR, Lee DJ, et al. Contemporary National Trends and variations of pelvic lymph node dissection in patients undergoing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Clin Genitourin Cancer 2021 Jan 28; S1558-7673(21)00028-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clgc.2021.01.005.

  63. Cacciamani GE, Maas M, Nassiri N, Ortega D, Gill K, Dell’Oglio P, Thalmann GN, Heidenreich A, Eastham JA, Evans CP, Karnes RJ, De Castro Abreu AL, Briganti A, Artibani W, Gill I, Montorsi F. Impact of pelvic lymph node dissection and its extent on perioperative morbidity in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Urol Oncol 2021 Mar 6:S2588-9311(21)00035-3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2021.02.001.

  64. Bründl J, Lenart S, Stojanoski G, Gilfrich C, Rosenhammer B, Stolzlechner M, Ponholzer A, Dreissig C, Weikert S, Burger M, May M. Peritoneal flap in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2020 Apr 3;117(14):243–50. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2020.0243.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Chenam A, Yuh B, Zhumkhawala A, Ruel N, Chu W, Lau C, Chan K, Wilson T, Yamzon J. Prospective randomised non-inferiority trial of pelvic drain placement vs no pelvic drain placement after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJU Int. 2018 Mar;121(3):357–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Grande P, Di Pierro GB, Mordasini L, Ferrari M, Würnschimmel C, Danuser H, Mattei A. Prospective randomized trial comparing titanium clips to bipolar coagulation in sealing lymphatic vessels during pelvic lymph node dissection at the time of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2017 Feb;71(2):155–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Buelens S, Van Praet C, Poelaert F, Van Huele A, Decaestecker K, Lumen N. Prospective randomized controlled trial exploring the effect of TachoSil on lymphocele formation after extended pelvic lymph node dissection in prostate cancer. Urology. 2018 Aug;118:134–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Gilbert DR, Angell J, Abaza R. Evaluation of absorbable hemostatic powder for prevention of lymphoceles following robotic prostatectomy with lymphadenectomy. Urology. 2016 Dec;98:75–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Mattei A, Fuechsel FG, Bhatta Dhar N, Warncke SH, Thalmann GN, Krause T, Studer UE. The template of the primary lymphatic landing sites of the prostate should be revisited: results of a multimodality mapping study. Eur Urol. 2008 Jan;53(1):118–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2007.07.035.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Mazzone E, Dell’Oglio P, Grivas N, Wit E, Donswijk M, Briganti A, van Leeuwen F, van der Poel H. Diagnostic value, oncological outcomes and safety profile of image-guided surgery technologies during robot-assisted lymph node dissection with sentinel node biopsy for prostate cancer. J Nucl Med. 2021 Feb 5; jnumed.120.259788. https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.120.259788.

  71. Harke NN, Godes M, Wagner C, Addali M, Fangmeyer B, Urbanova K, Hadaschik B, Witt JH. Fluorescence-supported lymphography and extended pelvic lymph node dissection in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a prospective, randomized trial. World J Urol. 2018 Nov;36(11):1817–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00345-018-2330-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Wit EMK, Acar C, Grivas N, Yuan C, Horenblas S, Liedberg F, Valdes Olmos RA, van Leeuwen FWB, van den Berg NS, Winter A, Wawroschek F, Hruby S, Janetschek G, Vidal-Sicart S, MacLennan S, Lam TB, van der Poel HG. Sentinel node procedure in prostate cancer: a systematic review to assess diagnostic accuracy. Eur Urol. 2017 Apr;71(4):596–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2016.09.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Ham WS, Park SY, Rha KH, Kim WT, Choi YD. Robotic radical prostatectomy for patients with locally advanced prostate cancer is feasible: results of a single-institution study. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 2009 Jun;19(3):329–32. https://doi.org/10.1089/lap.2008.0344.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  74. Rogers CG, Sammon JD, Sukumar S, Diaz M, Peabody J, Menon M. Robot assisted radical prostatectomy for elderly patients with high risk prostate cancer. Urol Oncol. 2013 Feb;31(2):193–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2010.11.018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Rodrigues Pessoa R, Urkmez A, Kukreja N, Baack J. Enhanced recovery after surgery review and urology applications in 2020. BJUI Compass. 2020;1:5–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/bco2.9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Suardi N, Gallina A, Lista G, Gandaglia G, Abdollah F, Capitanio U, Dell’Oglio P, Nini A, Salonia A, Montorsi F, Briganti A. Impact of adjuvant radiation therapy on urinary continence recovery after radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2014 Mar;65(3):546–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.01.027.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Ficarra V, Novara G, Rosen RC, Artibani W, Carroll PR, Costello A, Menon M, Montorsi F, Patel VR, Stolzenburg JU, Van der Poel H, Wilson TG, Zattoni F, Mottrie A. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting urinary continence recovery after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012 Sep;62(3):405–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.045.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Ficarra V, Novara G, Ahlering TE, Costello A, Eastham JA, Graefen M, Guazzoni G, Menon M, Mottrie A, Patel VR, Van der Poel H, Rosen RC, Tewari AK, Wilson TG, Zattoni F, Montorsi F. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting potency rates after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Eur Urol. 2012 Sep;62(3):418–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.05.046.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    Ahmet Urkmez & John W. Davis

Authors
  1. Ahmet Urkmez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. John W. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA

    Peter Wiklund

  2. Department of Urology, ORSI Academy, Aalst, Belgium

    Alexandre Mottrie

  3. Pediatric Urology, University of Chicago Medicine and Biological Sciences, Chicago, IL, USA

    Mohan S Gundeti

  4. Urology, Global Robotics Institute, Celebration, FL, USA

    Vipul Patel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Urkmez, A., Davis, J.W. (2022). Intraoperative Evaluation and Management of High-Risk Prostate Cancer during Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy. In: Wiklund, P., Mottrie, A., Gundeti, M.S., Patel, V. (eds) Robotic Urologic Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00363-9_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-00363-9_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-00362-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-00363-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation