With the onset of a metabolic syndrome epidemic and the increasing life expectancy, erectile dysfunction (ED) has become a more common condition. As incidence and prevalence increase, the medical field is focused on providing more appropriate therapies. It is common knowledge that ED is a chronic condition that is also associated with a myriad of other disorders. Conditions such as aging, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, obesity, prostatic hypertrophy, and prostate cancer, among others, have a direct implication on the onset and progression of ED. Characterization and recognition of risk factors may help clinicians recognize and properly treat patients suffering from ED. One of the most reliable treatments for ED is penile prosthetic surgery. Since the introduction of the penile prosthesis (PP) in the early seventies, this surgical procedure has improved the lives of thousands of men, with reliable and satisfactory results. The aim of this review article is to characterize the epidemiology of men undergoing penile prosthetic surgery, with a discussion about the most common conditions involved in the development of ED, and that ultimately drive patients into electing to undergo PP placement.
Diabetes Complications/surgery* ; Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology* ; Erectile Dysfunction/surgery* ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Impotence, Vasculogenic/surgery* ; Male ; Pelvic Bones/injuries* ; Penile Implantation/statistics & numerical data* ; Penile Induration/surgery* ; Penile Prosthesis ; Penis/injuries* ; Prostatectomy/adverse effects* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Radiation Injuries/surgery* ; Radiotherapy/adverse effects* ; Reoperation ; Spinal Cord Injuries/epidemiology* ; Vascular Diseases/epidemiology* ; Wounds and Injuries/epidemiology*

Emerging evidence has suggested that cytoreductive prostatectomy (CRP) allows superior oncologic control when compared to current standard of care androgen deprivation therapy alone. However, the safety and benefit of cytoreduction in metastatic prostate cancer (mPCa) has not been proven. Therefore, we evaluated the incidence of complications following CRP in men newly diagnosed with mPCa. A total of 68 patients who underwent CRP from 2006 to 2014 at four tertiary surgical centers were compared to 598 men who underwent radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer (PCa). Urinary incontinence was defined as the use of any pad. CRP had longer operative times (200 min vs 140 min, P < 0.0001) and higher estimated blood loss (250 ml vs 125 ml, P < 0.0001) compared to the control group. However, both overall (8.82% vs 5.85%) and major complication rates (4.41% vs 2.17%) were comparable between the two groups. Importantly, urinary incontinence rate at 1-year after surgery was significantly higher in the CRP group (57.4% vs 90.8%, P < 0.0001). Univariate logistic analysis showed that the estimated blood loss was the only independent predictor of perioperative complications both in the unadjusted model (OR: 1.18; 95% CI: 1.02-1.37; P = 0.025) and surgery type-adjusted model (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.01-1.36; P = 0.034). In conclusion, CRP is more challenging than radical prostatectomy and associated with a notably higher incidence of urinary incontinence. Nevertheless, CRP is a technically feasible and safe surgery for selecting PCa patients who present with node-positive or bony metastasis when performed by experienced surgeons. A prospective, multi-institutional clinical trial is currently underway to verify this concept.
Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Blood Loss, Surgical ; Cytoreduction Surgical Procedures/adverse effects* ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Neoplasm Grading ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Prostatectomy/adverse effects* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Urinary Incontinence/etiology*

We aim to reassess the safety of the monopolar transurethral resection of the prostate (M-TURP) without suprapubic cystostomy at our institution over the past decade. This retrospective study was conducted in patients who underwent M-TURP at Peking University First Hospital between 2003 and 2013. A total of 1680 patients who had undergone M-TURP were identified, including 539 patients in the noncystostomy group and 1141 patients in the cystostomy group. After propensity score matching, the number of patients in each group was 456. Smaller reductions in hemoglobin and hematocrit (10.9 g vs 17.6 g and 3.6% vs 4.7%, respectively) were found in the noncystostomy group. In addition, patients undergoing surgery without cystostomy had their catheters removed earlier (4.6 days vs 5.2 days), required shorter postoperative stays in the hospital (5.1 days vs 6.0 days), and were at lower risk of operative complications (5.7% vs 9.2%), especially bleeding requiring blood transfusion (2.9% vs 6.1%). Similar findings were observed in cohorts of prostates of 30-80 ml and prostates >80 ml. Furthermore, among patients with a resection weight >42.5 g or surgical time >90 min, or even propensity-matched patients based on surgical time, those with cystostomy seemed to be at a higher risk of operative complications. These results suggest that M-TURP without suprapubic cystostomy is a safe and effective method, even among patients with larger prostates, heavier estimated resection weights, and longer surgical times.
Aged ; Blood Transfusion ; Cystostomy/methods* ; Hematocrit ; Hemoglobins/analysis* ; Hemorrhage/epidemiology* ; Humans ; Intraoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Propensity Score ; Prostatectomy/methods* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Retrospective Studies ; Transurethral Resection of Prostate/methods* ; Treatment Outcome

Traditional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is a treatment choice in many developing countries and regions for most patients with localized prostate cancer; however, no system for predicting surgical difficulty and risk has been established. This study aimed to propose a simple and standard preoperative classification system of prostate cancer using preoperative data to predict surgical difficulty and risk and to evaluate the relationship between the data and postoperative complications. We collected data from 236 patients and divided them into three groups to evaluate and validate the relationships among preoperative, operative, and postoperative data. This new scoring system is based on the body mass index, ultrasonic prostate volume, preoperative prostate-specific antigen level, middle lobe protrusion, and clinical stage. In the scoring group, we classified 89 patients into two groups: the low-risk group (score of <4) and high-risk group (score of ≥4), and then compared the postoperative data between the two groups. The positive surgical margin rate was higher in the high-risk group than low-risk group. The results in validation Groups A and B were similar to those in the scoring group. The focus of our scoring system is to allow for preliminary assessment of surgical difficulty by collecting the patients' basic information. Urologists can easily use the scoring system to evaluate the surgical difficulty and predict the risks of a positive surgical margin and urinary incontinence in patients undergoing laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.
Body Mass Index ; Humans ; Laparoscopy ; Male ; Neoplasm Staging ; Postoperative Complications/epidemiology* ; Predictive Value of Tests ; Preoperative Period ; Prostate/diagnostic imaging* ; Prostate-Specific Antigen/analysis* ; Prostatectomy/statistics & numerical data* ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery* ; Risk Assessment ; Ultrasonography

Prostate cancer has the highest incidence among malignant tumors of the urinary system in China. Radical prostatectomy (RP) is the most effective treatment for localized prostate cancer with a good long-term prognosis. Erectile dysfunction (ED) is a common complication after RP, which seriously affects the patient's quality of life. With the rising incidence and early diagnosis of prostate cancer, the proportion of young cases of RP is increasing, and so is the importance of the treatment of post-RP ED. The restoration of erectile function after RP is closely related to the timing of penile rehabilitation as well as to pre- and intra-operative measures such as surgical strategies and methods. Common options for the treatment of post-RP ED include oral medication of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors, application of vasoactive substances in the urethra or corpus cavernosum, use of vacuum erection devices, and implantation of penile prosthesis. Stem cell therapy, nerve transplantation, low-intensity extracorporeal shockwave therapy, and erythropoietin have shown great potential in penile rehabilitation after RP. At present, the stress is placed on the remission of symptoms in the treatment of ED. Stem cell therapy may reverse the cause of disease or cure ED by reversing its pathophysiological changes. A series of clinical trials of stem cell therapy are underway and have preliminarily confirmed the safety of stem cell therapy and proved that it can improve erectile function in patients with post-RP ED. This review focuses on the progress in the prevention and treatment of ED after RP.
China ; Erectile Dysfunction ; prevention & control ; therapy ; Humans ; Male ; Penile Erection ; Penile Prosthesis ; Phosphodiesterase 5 Inhibitors ; therapeutic use ; Postoperative Complications ; prevention & control ; therapy ; Prostatectomy ; adverse effects ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Quality of Life ; Stem Cell Transplantation ; Treatment Outcome ; Vacuum ; Vasodilator Agents ; therapeutic use

Objective: To compare the clinical effects of transperitoneal (Tp) versus extraperitoneal (Ep) robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Wanfang, CNKI, and CBM for the articles comparing the clinical effect Tp-RARP with that of Ep-RARP in the treatment of localized prostate cancer published from January 2000 to November 2016. All the articles must meet the inclusion criteria, that is, dealing with at least one of the following aspects: operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative catheterization time, length of bed confinement, perioperative complications, positive surgical margins, bowel-related complications, postoperative anastomotic leakage, and postoperative urinary continence. We subjected the data obtained to statistical analysis using the RevMan5.3 software. RESULTS: Two randomized controlled trials and six case-control studies were included in this meta-analysis, involving 451 cases of Tp-RARP and 676 cases of Ep-RARP. Compared with Tp-RARP, Ep-RARP showed significantly shorter operation time (WMD = 21.39, 95% CI: 7.54－35.24, P = 0.002), shorter length of bed confinement (WMD = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.61－1.09, P <0.001), and lower rate of bowel-related complications (RR = 9.74, 95% CI: 3.26－29.07, P <0.001). However, no statistically significant differences were found between the two strategies in intraoperative blood loss (WMD = －8.12, 95% CI: －27.86－11.63, P = 0.42), postoperative catheterization time (WMD = 0.17, 95% CI: －0.55－0.21, P = 0.38), or the rates of perioperative complications (RR = 1.34, 95% CI: －0.97－1.87, P = 0.08), positive surgical margins (RR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.95－1.61, P = 0.12), anastomotic leakage (RR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.46－2.10, P = 0.95), urinary continence at 3 months (RR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.91－1.00, P = 0.05) and urinary continence at 6 months (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.97－1.02, P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS Ep-RARP has the advantages of shorter operation time, shorter length of bed confinement and lower rate of bowel-related complications over Tp-RARP, and therefore may be a better option for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. However, more multi-centered randomized controlled clinical trials are needed for further evaluation of these two approaches.
Blood Loss, Surgical ; Case-Control Studies ; Humans ; Male ; Margins of Excision ; Operative Time ; Postoperative Complications ; Prostatectomy ; adverse effects ; methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; pathology ; surgery ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Robotic Surgical Procedures ; adverse effects ; methods ; Treatment Outcome

PURPOSE: To systematically update evidence on the clinical efficacy and safety of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) versus retropubic radical prostatectomy (RRP) in patients with prostate cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic databases, including ovidMEDLINE, ovidEMBASE, the Cochrane Library, KoreaMed, KMbase, and others, were searched, collecting data from January 1980 to August 2013. The quality of selected systematic reviews was assessed using the revised assessment of multiple systematic reviews and the modified Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for non-randomized studies. RESULTS: A total of 61 studies were included, including 38 from two previous systematic reviews rated as best available evidence and 23 additional studies that were more recent. There were no randomized controlled trials. Regarding safety, the risk of complications was lower for RARP than for RRP. Among functional outcomes, the risk of urinary incontinence was lower and potency rate was significantly higher for RARP than for RRP. Regarding oncologic outcomes, positive margin rates were comparable between groups, and although biochemical recurrence (BCR) rates were lower for RARP than for RRP, recurrence-free survival was similar after long-term follow up. CONCLUSION: RARP might be favorable to RRP in regards to post-operative complications, peri-operative outcomes, and functional outcomes. Positive margin and BCR rates were comparable between the two procedures. As most of studies were of low quality, the results presented should be interpreted with caution, and further high quality studies controlling for selection, confounding, and selective reporting biases with longer-term follow-up are needed to determine the clinical efficacy and safety of RARP.
Humans ; Male ; Postoperative Complications/*etiology ; Prostatectomy/*adverse effects/methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms/surgery ; Robotic Surgical Procedures/*adverse effects ; Treatment Outcome ; Urinary Incontinence/etiology

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of intravesical prostatic protrusion (IPP) on the outcomes of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 1094 men who underwent RALP from January 2007 to March 2013 were analyzed using our database to identify 641 additional men without IPP (non-IPP group). We excluded 259 patients who presented insufficient data and 14 patients who did not have an MRI image. We compared the following parameters: preoperative transrectal ultrasound, prostate specific antigen (PSA), clinicopathologic characteristics, intraoperative characteristics, postoperative oncologic characteristics, minor and major postoperative complications, and continence until postoperative 1 year. IPP grade was stratified by grade into three groups: Grade 1 (IPP≤5 mm), Grade 2 (5 mm10 mm). RESULTS: Of the 821 patients who underwent RALP, 557 (67.8%) experienced continence at postoperative 3 months, 681 (82.9%) at 6 months, and 757 (92.2%) at 12 months. According to IPP grade, there were significant differences in recovering full continence at postoperative 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, IPP was the most powerful predictor of postoperative continence in patients who underwent RALP (p<0.001). Using a generalized estimating equation model, IPP also was shown to be the most powerful independent variable for postoperative continence in patients who underwent RALP (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with low-grade IPP have significantly higher chances of recovering full continence. Therefore, the known IPP grade will be helpful during consultations with patients before RALP.
Aged, 80 and over ; Humans ; Laparoscopy/methods ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Multivariate Analysis ; Postoperative Complications/etiology ; Prostatectomy/*methods ; Prostatic Neoplasms/complications/*surgery ; *Recovery of Function ; *Robotic Surgical Procedures ; Urinary Bladder Neck Obstruction/*diagnostic imaging/etiology ; *Urination

OBJECTIVETo compare the effect of transurethral resection of the prostate combined with endocrine therapy (TURP + ET) with that of αlA-blockers combined with ET ((αlA-b + ET) in the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) in patients with advanced prostate cancer (PCa), and to investigate the safety of the TURP + ET for the treatment of PCa with BOO.

METHODSWe retrospectively analyzed 63 cases of PCa with BOO, 28 treated by αlA-b + ET and the other 35 by TURP + ET. We obtained the residual urine volume (RV), maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax), International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), and quality of life score (QoL) before and after treatment along with the overall survival rate of the patients, followed by comparison of the parameters between the two methods.

RESULTSAt 3 months after treatment, RV, IPSS, and QoL in the TURP + ET group were significantly decreased from (137.8 ± 27.6) ml, (22.3 ± 3.6), and (4.2 ± 0.8) to (29 ± 13.6) ml, (7.8 ± 2.1), and (1.6 ± 0.5) respectively (P < 0.05), while Qmax increased from (5.6 ± 2.1) ml/s to (17.6 ± 2.7) ml/s (P < 0.05); the former three parameters in the αlA-b + ET group decreased from (133.6 ± 24.9) ml, (21.5 ± 3.2), and (4.7 ± 1.1) to (42 ± 18.3) ml, (12.8 ± 2.6), and (2.5 ± 0.7) respectively (P < 0.05), while the latter one increased from (6.3 ± 2.4) ml/s to (11.7 ± 2.3) ml/s (P < 0.05), all with statistically significant differences between the two groups (P < 0.05). The overall survival rate of the TURP + ET group was not significantly different from that of the αlA-b + ET group (51.4% vs 46.4% , P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONTURP + ET is preferable to αlA-b + ET for its advantage of relieving BOO symptoms in advanced PCa without affecting the overall survival rate of the patients.

Adrenergic alpha-1 Receptor Antagonists ; therapeutic use ; Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal ; therapeutic use ; Combined Modality Therapy ; methods ; Humans ; Male ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; complications ; drug therapy ; pathology ; surgery ; Quality of Life ; Retrospective Studies ; Transurethral Resection of Prostate ; Treatment Outcome ; Urinary Bladder Neck Obstruction ; drug therapy ; etiology ; surgery

Prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and rectal cancer are common malignancies in the male pelvis. The incidence rate of erectile dysfunction (ED) following radical prostatectomy, cystectomy or rectal cancer surgery is about 25% - 100%. The main cause of post-surgery ED is mainly attributed to injury of neurovascular bundles, which may lead to reduced oxygenation in and fibrosis of the penile tissue. Early penile rehabilitation after surgery can improve or restore the erectile function of the patients. This article focuses on penile rehabilitation after radical pelvic surgery.
Cystectomy ; Erectile Dysfunction ; etiology ; rehabilitation ; Humans ; Male ; Pelvic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Penile Erection ; Penis ; Postoperative Complications ; rehabilitation ; Postoperative Period ; Prostatectomy ; adverse effects ; Prostatic Neoplasms ; surgery ; Rectal Neoplasms ; surgery ; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms ; surgery