LRP is a safe procedure with low morbidity. As surgeons progress through the learning curve, perioperative parameters and oncologic outcomes improve. Using a carefully mentored approach, LRP can be safely introduced as a new procedure without compromising patient outcomes.

We compared the outcomes of percutaneous nerve evaluation (PNE) with first-stage tined lead placement (FSTLP) for the testing phase of sacral nerve neuromodulation (SNM), and we assessed the outcomes of these two techniques following implantation of a (second-stage) permanent sacral nerve stimulator (SNS). Methods: Seventy consecutive patients had either PNE (n = 35) or FSTLP (n = 35) evaluation, and conversion to a permanent SNS implant according to response. Primary outcomes were assessed using frequency-volume charts, pad testing, ICIQ/EQ5D questionnaires and global health perception visual analogue scale (VAS). Success was considered if they achieved greater than 50% improvement in their urinary symptoms. Success and failure rates were compared during the test phase and after implantation of the SNS. Results: Mean follow-up for the FSTLP group was 14 months (nine to 20) and for the PNE group was 22 months (eight to 27). Sixteen (46%) of the PNE tests and 20 (57%) of the FSTLP patients were converted to permanent implant. A significant correlation was noted between patients' general health (VAS score) and a successful test phase (r = 0.297, p = 0.013). Eighteen of 19 (95%) of tined lead patients have successful SNS implants, whereas five of 16 (31%) of PNE evaluations failed to convert test efficacy to the permanent SNS implant (p = 0.042). Furthermore, two of PNE-SNS patients were successfully salvaged by the implantation of a second tined lead. Conclusions: FSTLP-SNS has a significantly higher success rate than PNE-SNS in converting the test phase to SNS implantation. This may be due in part to difficulties retaining accurate lead placement with the two-lead (PNE-SNS) approach. These findings have important cost and logistical implications for SNS services.

BackgroundThe importance of 2-yr postradiotherapy prostate biopsy status remains uncertain.ObjectiveTo assess the value of 2 year post treatment biopsies in a randomised trial of radiotherapy dose escalation.Design, setting, and participantsBetween 1998 and 2001, 843 men with localised prostate cancer were randomised to receive either control-64 Gy or escalated-74 Gy conformal radiotherapy (CFRT) in the MRC RT01 trial in combination with 3–6-mo neoadjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Prostate biopsies were planned at 2 yr from start of CFRT in suitable men.Outcome measurements and statistical analysisProstate biopsy results and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels performed at 2 yr post-CFRT were evaluated with long-term biochemical progression free survival (bPFS) and overall survival. Outcome measures were timed from the 2-yr biopsy using a landmark approach.Results and limitationsA 2-yr biopsy was performed in 312/843 patients. One hundred and seventy-seven patients were included in the per-protocol group with median follow-up of 7.8 yr from biopsy. Median PSA at biopsy was 0.5 ng/ml. Sixty-four bPFS events were reported: 46/145 (32%) in patients with negative, 6/18 (33%) suspicious, and 12/14 (86%) positive biopsies. A positive biopsy was prognostic of worse bPFS, going forward, compared with negative and suspicious biopsies, hazard ratio (HR) = 4.81 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.50–9.26, p < 0.001). The estimate for survival was HR = 1.58 (95% CI: 0.52–4.78, p = 0.42). PSA values at 2 yr between 1.01 ng/ml and 2.09 ng/ml were also associated with subsequent PSA failures (HR = 2.71, 95% CI: 1.98–3.71), bPFS events (HR = 2.45, 95% CI: 1.81–3.32), and prostate cancer-specific survival (HR = 2.87, 95% CI: 1.08–7.64) compared with PSA ≤1.0 ng/ml.ConclusionsTwo-year postradiotherapy prostate biopsies have limited value in patients with PSA control but both positive biopsy and higher PSA status are strongly associated with future bPFS events. A policy of selected biopsy may provide an opportunity for early salvage interventions.Patient summaryRoutine 2-yr postradiotherapy biopsy is not recommended but can be considered in selected patients with unfavourable post-treatment prostate-specific antigen levels who are suitable for early salvage treatments.

Introduction: Robotic radical prostatectomy (RRP) is an established treatment for prostate cancer in selected centres with appropriate expertise. We studied our single-centre experience of developing a RRP service and subsequent training of 2 additional surgeons by the initial surgeon and the introduction of United Kingdom's first nationally accredited robotic fellowship training programme. We assessed the learning curve of the 3 surgeons with regard to peri-operative outcomes and oncological results. Patients and Methods: Three hundred consecutive patients underwent RRP between November 2008 and August 2012. Patients were divided into 3 equal groups (Group 1, case 1-100; Group 2, case 101-200; and Group 3, case 201-300). Age, ASA score, preoperative co-morbidities and indications for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy were comparable for all 3 patient groups. Peri-operative and oncological outcomes were compared across all 3 groups to assess the impact of the learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. All surgical complications were classified using the Clavien-Dindo system. Results: The mean age was 60.7 years (range 41-74). There was a significant reduction in the mean console time (p < 0.001), operating time (p < 0.001), mean length of hospital stay (p < 0.001) and duration of catheter (p < 0.001) between the 3 groups as the series progressed. The two most important factors predictive of positive surgical margins (PSM) at RRP were the initial prostate specific antigen (PSA) and tumor stage at diagnosis. The overall PSM rate was 26.7%. For T2/T3 tumors the incidence of PSM reduced as the series progressed (Group 1- 22%, Group 2- 32% and Group 3- 26%). The incidence of major complications i.e. grade Clavien-Dindo system score ≤ III was 2% (6/300). Conclusion: RRP is a safe procedure with low morbidity. As surgeons progress through the learning curve peri-operative parameters and oncological outcomes improve. This learning curve is not affected by the introduction of a fellowship-training programme. Using a carefully structured mentored approach, RRP can be safely introduced as a new procedure without compromising patient outcomes.

RLPP could be used as an objective and potentially more reliable substitute to pad weight to objectify and stratify SUI in post-prostatectomy patients. Neurourol. Urodynam. 36:1119-1123, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.