OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the effect of pelvic floor muscle exercise (PFME) on urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy.
METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP and other domestic and foreign databases were searched for published literature until December 2023 on the effect of pelvic muscle exercise on urinary incontinence in patients after radical prostatectomy. The retrieved literatures were screened, and data were extracted. After evaluating the quality of the literatures, RevMan 5.4 software was used for meta-analysis.
RESULTS: This work included nine articles consisting of 1208 sufferers with urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy. The forest plot showed that patients in the experimental group had better postoperative outcomes at 1 month (Relative Risk (RR) = 3.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.83; 6.25)), 3 months (RR = 1.99, 95% CI (1.67; 2.38)) and 6 months (RR = 1.34, 95% CI (1.20; 1.49)). The incidence of urinary incontinence was statistically significant compared with the control group (p < 0.05). Patients in the experimental group 12 months after surgery (RR = 1.13, 95% CI (0.99; 1.23)) showed no significant difference in the incidence of urinary incontinence compared with the control group (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: PFME can significantly increase the recovery rate of urinary incontinence in sufferers with prostate cancer at 1, 3 and 6 months after radical surgery but have no significant improvement at 12 months. Urodynamic analysis may be needed for patients with long-term urinary incontinence.

Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) has improved patient recovery, but achieving optimal functional outcomes remains a challenge, especially early urinary continence. The Modified Apical Dissection (MAD) technique has been suggested to improve early continence compared to conventional RALP. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central databases was conducted to identify studies on MAD from inception to March 2024. The risk of bias was evaluated using the ROBINS-I tool. Primary outcomes assessed included urinary continence, positive surgical margin rate, biochemical recurrence rates, and complication rates. Out of 789 studies screened initially, we selected 8 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Our analysis showed that patients who underwent the MAD technique had a significantly higher likelihood of achieving early urinary continence compared to those undergoing conventional RALP at the initial follow-up (Odds Ratio [OR] = 4.0, 95% CI = 1.87-8.57). This advantage continued at 1 month (OR = 5.44, 95% CI = 2.98-9.92), 3 months (OR = 5.36, 95% CI = 2.26-12.71), and 6 months (OR = 5.18, 95% CI = 1.51-17.75), though no significant difference was noted at 12 months. There were no significant differences in positive surgical margin rate or biochemical recurrence rate between MAD and conventional RALP. The overall complication rate was 10.9% (95% CI = 8.10-14.06), with most complications being classified as minor (Clavien-Dindo I-II). In summary, our meta-analysis suggests that the MAD technique may lead to earlier recovery of urinary continence without compromising oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing RALP. While there are published studies on the outcomes of MAD, only a few have the appropriate design with a comparison group needed for meta-analysis and discussing various endpoints. More randomized controlled trials are necessary, but the current literature still lacks retrospective studies with comparison groups.

This meta-analysis aimed to compare perioperative outcome measures between the AirSeal system and conventional insufflation system in robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. Up to May 2024, comprehensive searches were conducted across various prominent databases worldwide, such as PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar, focusing solely on English-language materials. Reviews and protocols devoid of published data were excluded, along with conference abstracts and articles unrelated to the study\'s aims. Primary outcome measures encompassed operative duration and hospitalization length, while secondary outcome measures included estimated blood loss and complications. The meta-analysis included five cohort studies, encompassing a total of 1503 patients. In comparison to the conventional insufflation system group, the AirSeal group displayed shorter operative times (WMD - 15.62, 95% CI - 21.87 to - 9.37; p < 0.00001) and reduced hospital stays (WMD - 0.45, 95% CI - 0.60 to - 0.30; p < 0.00001). Fewer major complications (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.66; p = 0.01). Notably, there were no significant differences observed in estimated blood loss or overall complications between the two groups. Compared to conventional insufflation systems, employing the AirSeal system in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy appears to potentially decrease operative time and hospital length of stay without a concurrent rise in estimated blood loss or complication rates.

OBJECTIVE: Prostate cancer (PCa) represents a significant health burden globally, ranking as the most diagnosed cancer among men and a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Conventional treatment methods such as radiation therapy or radical prostatectomy have significant side effects which often impact quality of life. As our understanding of the natural history and progression of PCa has evolved, so has the evolution of management options.
RESULTS: Active surveillance (AS) has become an increasingly favored approach to the management of very low, low, and properly selected favorable intermediate risk PCa. AS permits ongoing observation and postpones intervention until definitive treatment is required. There are, however, challenges with selecting patients for AS, which further emphasizes the need for more precise tools to better risk stratify patients and choose candidates more accurately. Tissue-based biomarkers, such as ProMark, Prolaris, GPS (formerly Oncotype DX), and Decipher, are valuable because they improve the accuracy of patient selection for AS and offer important information on the prognosis and severity of disease. By enabling patients to be categorized according to their risk profiles, these biomarkers help physicians and patients make better informed treatment choices and lower the possibility of overtreatment. Even with their potential, further standardization and validation of these biomarkers is required to guarantee their broad clinical utility. Active surveillance has emerged as a preferred strategy for managing low-risk prostate cancer, and tissue-based biomarkers play a crucial role in refining patient selection and risk stratification. Standardization and validation of these biomarkers are essential to ensure their widespread clinical use and optimize patient outcomes.

There is controversy regarding the most effective primary treatment of choice for prostate cancer (PCa) in terms of patient outcomes, such as surgery or radiotherapy (RT). This study evaluated the comparative efficacy and long-term outcomes of radical prostatectomy (RP) and RT for PCa treatment. A thorough literature review of relevant databases was conducted, focusing on academic and clinical studies published from 2019 onwards. The inclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and other observational studies comparing survival outcomes in patients treated with surgery and RT. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines to provide an overview of the data. We selected 19 studies based on the inclusion criteria. Of the total 19 studies, 12 advocated RP as the preferred treatment to improve survival outcomes in patients with PCa. The results of our synthesis showed that prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM) was lower in patients treated with RT. The total effect size for the analysis was calculated as Z=1.19 (p-value=0.23). The heterogeneity in the studies was as follows: Tau2=0.09, Chi2=20.25, df=4, I2=80%. Moreover, overall survival (OS) was shown to be higher in patients who underwent prostatectomy. The combined effect for the analysis was found to be: HR=0.97 (0.93, 1.01). The total effect was calculated as Z=1.33 (p-value= 0.18). The heterogeneity was found to be Tau2=0.00, Chi2=1.33, df=2, and I2=0%. However, overall mortality (OM) was shown to be independent of the treatment modality. RT is the preferred strategy for PCa treatment, as it balances efficacy and long-term outcomes. Clinical decision-making should consider individual patient characteristics and future research should delve into specific subpopulations and long-term outcomes to further refine the treatment guidelines.

Several phase II trials have investigated neoadjuvant novel androgen receptor signaling inhibitors (ARSIs) in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) followed by radical prostatectomy (RP) in prostate cancer (PC) patients. However, data regarding complications of intense hormone therapy and surgical complications are scarce. Our objective was to evaluate the occurrence of cardiovascular (CV) and thromboembolic (TE) adverse events (AE) in patients with localized PC who have received intense neoadjuvant ADT followed by prostatectomy. A comprehensive search in MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus and conference abstracts was performed. The strategies were developed and applied for each electronic database on March 7th, 2023. Eligible studies included randomized and single-arm trials testing ARSIs prior to prostatectomy that adequately reported safety data regarding CV and TE AE, peri-operative complications, and mortality during therapy. Pooled incidence (PI) of AE with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was estimated using a random effects model. Quality assessment and reporting followed Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and PRISMA guidelines. PROSPERO: CRD42022344104. Nine randomized controlled trials and three single-arm phase II trials were included, comprising 702 patients (702 patients for CV AE and 522 for perioperative complications). The neoadjuvant regimen was classified as monotherapy with ARSI (100 patients), combination therapy with ADT + ARSI (383 patients), or ADT + ARSI + ARSI (219 patients). The PI of TE within the perioperative interval was 4.2% (95% CI = 2.6%-6.6%, I2 = 0.0%, P = .65), and the PI for CV AE was 4.6% (95% CI = 3.1%-6.7%, I2 = 0.0%, P = .71). Seven deaths were reported, resulting in a PI of 2.2% (95% CI = 1.3%-3.8%, I2 = 0.0%, P = .99), of which two were considered treatment-related and occurred within the perioperative period. The PI of hypertension grade 3-5 was 7.3% (95% CI = 4.8%-11.0%, I2 = 38.8%, P = .04). CV and TE AE associated with intense neoadjuvant hormone therapy in patients with localized PC can occur in up to 4.6% of cases. Our data warns for further assessment of thrombotic risk and prophylactic anticoagulation in this setting.

BACKGROUND: First-line treatment options for patients with erectile dysfunction whose medical management has failed include the inflatable penile prosthesis (IPP). Many patients with an IPP require subsequent urologic surgery, during which the reservoir of the IPP can be injured.
OBJECTIVE: This review aims to present a summary of current literature related to iatrogenic injuries to the IPP sustained during urologic surgery.
METHODS: Two reviewers independently performed a systematic search on PubMed using standardized search terms to identify pertinent articles. After preliminary review, relevant studies were analyzed to identify the presence of perioperative complications resulting in IPP reservoir injury. Results were categorized by surgical procedures.
RESULTS: Among 13 articles included, all were based on urologic surgery. Four studies identified IPP reservoir injury as a result of surgical injury. Of these, injuries occurred during radical prostatectomy (n = 3) and prostatic urethral lift surgery (UroLift, n = 1). Most radical prostatectomy studies without IPP reservoir injuries also described intentional surgical techniques that were employed to prevent reservoir damage, including modulation of reservoir inflation-deflation (n = 3), temporary reservoir repositioning (n = 1), or reservoir capsule dissection to improve visualization (n = 1). Findings from an additional novel case report on IPP injury during a UroLift procedure are presented in this review.
CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of studies identified intraoperative IPP reservoir injury as a significant complication of urologic surgery, particularly during radical prostatectomy. Novel case report findings also contribute the only other case of IPP reservoir damage sustained from delivery of UroLift implants. Findings are used to create a standardized surgical checklist that guides perioperative planning measures prior to pursuing surgery in adjacent spaces.

UNASSIGNED: To analyze data available in the literature regarding a possible prognostic value of the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) in prostate cancer (PCa) patients stratified in non-metastatic and metastatic diseases.
UNASSIGNED: A literature search process was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. In our meta-analysis, the pooled event rate estimated and the pooled hazard ratio were calculated using a random effect model.
UNASSIGNED: Forty-two articles were selected for our analysis. The pooled risk difference for non-organ confined PCa between high and low NLR cases was 0.06 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.03-0.15) and between high and low PLR cases increased to 0.30 (95% CI: 0.16-0.43). In non-metastatic PCa cases, the pooled hazard ratio for overall mortality between high and low NLR was 1.33 (95% CI: 0.78-1.88) and between high and low PLR was 1.47 (95% CI: 0.91-2.03), whereas in metastatic PCa cases, between high and low NLR was 1.79 (95% CI: 1.44-2.13) and between high and low PLR was 1.05 (95% CI: 0.87-1.24).
UNASSIGNED: The prognostic values of NLR and PLR in terms of PCa characteristics and responses after treatment show a high level of heterogeneity of results among studies. These two ratios can represent the inflammatory and immunity status of the patient related to several conditions. A higher predictive value is related to a high NLR in terms of risk for overall mortality in metastatic PCa cases under systemic treatments.

OBJECTIVE: The implementation of quality assurance programs (QAPs) within urological practice has gained prominence; yet, their impact on outcomes after radical prostatectomy (RP) remains uncertain. This paper aims to systematically review the current literature regarding the implementation of QAPs and their impact on outcomes after robot-assisted RP, laparoscopic RP, and open prostatectomy, collectively referred to as RP.
METHODS: A systematic Embase, Medline (OvidSP), and Scopus search was conducted, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) process, on January 12, 2024. Studies were identified and included if these covered implementation of QAPs and their impact on outcomes after RP. QAPs were defined as any intervention seeking quality improvement through critically reviewing, analyzing, and discussing outcomes. Included studies were assessed critically using the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, with results summarized narratively.
UNASSIGNED: Ten included studies revealed two methodological strategies: periodic performance feedback and surgical video assessments. Despite conceptual variability, QAPs improved outcomes consistently (ie, surgical margins, urine continence, erectile function, and hospital readmissions). Of the two strategies, video assessments better identified suboptimal surgical practice and technical errors. Although the extent of quality improvements did not appear to correlate with the frequency of QAPs, there was an apparent correlation with whether or not outcomes were evaluated collectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Current findings suggest that QAPs have a positive impact on outcomes after RP. Caution in interpretation due to limited data is advised. More extensive research is required to explore how conceptual differences impact the extent of quality improvements.
RESULTS: In this paper, we review the available scientific literature regarding the implementation of quality assurance programs and their impact on outcomes after radical prostatectomy. The included studies offered substantial support for the implementation of quality assurance programs as an incentive to improve the quality of care continuously.

Lymphocele is one of the most common complications after radical prostatectomy. Multiple authors have proposed the use of vessel sealants or peritoneal interposition techniques as preventive interventions. This study aimed to aggregate and analyze the available literature on different interventions which seek to prevent lymphocele through a Bayesian Network. A systematic review was performed to identify prospective studies evaluating strategies for lymphocele prevention after robot assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy + pelvic lymph node dissection. Data was inputted into Review Manager 5.4 for pairwise meta-analysis. Data was then used to build a network in R Studio. These networks were used to model 200,000 Markov Chains via MonteCarlo sampling. The results are expressed as odds ratios (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI). Meta-regression was used to determine coefficient of change and adjust for pelvic lymph node dissection extent. Ten studies providing data from 2211 patients were included. 1097 patients received an intervention and 1114 patients served as controls. Interposition with fenestration had the lowest risk of developing a lymphocele (OR 0.14 [0.04, 0.50], p = 0.003). All interventions, except sealants or patches, had significant decreased odds of lymphocele rates. Meta-analysis of all the included studies showed a decreased risk of developing a lymphocele (OR 0.42 [0.33, 0.53], p < 0.00001) for the intervention group. Perivesical fixation and interposition with fenestration appear to be effective interventions for reducing the overall incidence of lymphocele.