Korean J Urol.  2011 Oct;52(10):664-668. 10.4111/kju.2011.52.10.664.

Interval from Prostate Biopsy to Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy (RALP): Effects on Surgical Difficulties

• Kim IS
• Na W
• Nam JS
• Oh JJ
• Jeong CW
• Hong SK
• Byun SS
• Lee SE

• KMID: 2061427
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4111/kju.2011.52.10.664

Abstract

PURPOSE
Traditionally, an interval of 4 to 6 weeks has been recommended after prostate biopsy before open radical prostatectomy. However, such an interval is not explicitly specified in robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP). This study was designed to determine whether the interval from prostate biopsy to RALP affects surgical difficulties.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Between January 2008 and May 2009, a total of 237 men underwent RALP in our institution. The interval from biopsy to RALP was categorized as follows: < or = 2 weeks, >2 to < or = 4 weeks, >4 to < or = 6 weeks, >6 to < or = 8 weeks, and >8 weeks. Multivariate analysis was used to identify whether the interval from prostate biopsy to RALP was an independent predictor of operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), margin positivity, continence, and potency.
RESULTS
Among the 5 groups, there were no significant differences in age, body mass index (BMI), preoperative serum prostate-specific antigen (PSA), prostate volume, or preoperative International Index of Erectile Dysfunction-5 score (all p>0.05). In the multivariate analysis, operative time was significantly associated with prostate volume. EBL was associated with prostate volume and BMI. Margin positivity was associated with preoperative serum PSA, prostate volume, and biopsy Gleason score. Postoperative continence and potency were significantly associated with age. However, in univariate and multivariate analyses, the interval from biopsy to RALP was not significantly associated with operative time, EBL, margin positivity, postoperative continence, or potency (all p>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
Our data suggest that the interval from prostate biopsy to RALP is not related to surgical difficulties.

Keyword

Prostate biopsy; Prostate neoplasms; Robot-assisted prostatectomy

MeSH Terms

Biopsy
Body Mass Index
Humans
Male
Multivariate Analysis
Neoplasm Grading
Operative Time
Prostate
Prostate-Specific Antigen
Prostatectomy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Prostate-Specific Antigen

Reference

1. Shah JB, McKiernan JM, Elkin EP, Carroll PR, Meng MV. CaPSURE Investigators. Prostate biopsy patterns in the CaPSURE database: evolution with time and impact on outcome after prostatectomy. J Urol. 2008; 179:136–140. PMID: 17997437.

2. Walsh PC, Partin AW. Wein AJ, Kavoussi LR, Novick AC, Partin AW, Peters CA, editors. Anatomic radical retropubic prostatectomy. Campbell-Walsh Urology. 2007. 9th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders;p. 2959.

3. Ikonen S, Kivisaari L, Vehmas T, Tervahartiala P, Salo Jo, Taari K, et al. Optimal timing of post-biopsy MR imaging of the prostate. Acta Radiol. 2001; 42:70–73. PMID: 11167335.

4. Lee DK, Allareddy V, O'donnell MA, Williams RD, Konety BR. Does the interval between prostate biopsy and radical prostatectomy affect the immediate postoperative outcome? BJU Int. 2006; 97:48–50. PMID: 16336327.

5. Eggener SE, Yossepowitch O, Serio AM. Radical prostatectomy shortly after prostate biopsy does not affect operative difficulty or efficacy. Urology. 2007; 69:1128–1133. PMID: 17572200.

6. Martin GL, Nunez RN, Humphreys MD, Martin AD, Ferrigni RG, Andrews PE, et al. Interval from prostate biopsy to robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: effects on perioperative outcomes. BJU Int. 2009; 104:1734–1737. PMID: 19549123.

7. Menon M, Tewari A, Baize B, Guillonneau B, Vallancien G. Prospective comparison of radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted anatomic prostatectomy: the vattikuti urology institute experience. Urology. 2002; 60:864–868. PMID: 12429317.

8. Tewari A, Srivasatava A, Menon M. Members of the VIP Team. A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution. BJU Int. 2003; 92:205–210. PMID: 12887468.

9. Choi H, Ko YH, Kang SG, Kang SH, Park HS, Cheon J, et al. Biopsy related prostate status does not affect on the clinicopathological outcome of robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Cancer Res Treat. 2009; 41:205–210. PMID: 20057965.

10. Lee JW, Jeong WJ, Park SY, Loreazo EI, Oh CK, Rha KH, et al. Learning curve for robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for pathologic T2 disease. Korean J Urol. 2010; 51:30–33. PMID: 20414407.

11. Shibata A, Mohanasundaram UM, Terris MK. Interval from prostate biopsy to radical prostatectomy: effect on PSA, Gleason sum, and risk of recurrence. Urology. 2005; 66:808–813. PMID: 16230143.

12. Boorjian SA, Bianco FJ Jr, Scardino PT, Eastham JA. Does the time from biopsy to surgery affect biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy? BJU Int. 2005; 96:773–776. PMID: 16153197.

13. Khan MA, Mangold LA, Epstein JI, Boitnott JK, Walsh PC, Partin AW. Impact of surgical delay on long-term cancer control for clinically localized prostate cancer. J Urol. 2004; 172(5 pt 1):1835–1839. PMID: 15540733.