The effects of method of anaesthesia on the safety and effectiveness of Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy

Submitted: October 12, 2022
Accepted: October 31, 2022
Published: December 27, 2022
Abstract Views: 602
PDF: 320
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

Objective: The aim of this study is to determine if patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy with localized prostate cancer under combined (epidural-spinal) anaesthesia have any benefit over patients undergoing the procedure under general anaesthesia.
Material and Methods: Patients with clinically localised prostate cancer, scheduled for radical retropubic prostatectomy, were allocated to undergo the operation under either general anaesthesia (GA) or under combined (epidural-spinal) (CESA) anaesthesia. Several parameters were recorded both preoperatively (medical history, biometric data, PSA, biopsy Gleason score) and postoperatively (blood pressure, heart rate, haemoglobin levels, operation time and total hospital stay). In addition, mean arterial pressure, change in heart rate, total blood loss, blood transfusions, SAS score, intravenous fluid administration and operation time were also noted down intraoperatively. Patient pain levels and total satisfaction were evaluated using appropriate questionnaires. At the 12-month follow-up, biochemical recurrence using PSA levels and urinary continence status were evaluated.
Results: A total of 60 patients were included (30 in each group). Intraoperatively, mean MAP and heart rate change was higher in the GA group (MAP+7,46, HR+27) and mean SAS was higher in the CESA group (+0.93). The time needed for patients’ recovery was faster (-3.5 min) and hospitalization was shorter for patients in the CESA group (-0.6 days). Intraoperative blood loss, time for induction and duration of operation were not significantly different. Mean postoperative drop of haemoglobin was greater in the GA group (+0.56) while blood transfusions, VAS pain scores and amount of intravenous fluids did not differ significantly between the two groups. No complications were reported. Patient satisfaction and urinary continence were comparable between the groups and there were no cases of biochemical recurrence.
Conclusions: Radical retropubic prostatectomy can safely be performed under combined (spinal epidural anaesthesia, with possible benefits of lower blood loss, less post-operative complications and earlier discharge. Both procedures have equal oncological and functional outcomes at the 12-month follow-up.

Dimensions

Altmetric

PlumX Metrics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations

Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2022. CA Cancer J Clin 2022;72(1):7-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21708
Hatzinger M, Hubmann R, Moll F, Sohn M. [The history of prostate cancer from the beginning to DaVinci]. Aktuelle Urol 2012;43(4):228-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1324651
Lepor H. A review of surgical techniques for radical prostatectomy. Rev Urol 2005;7 Suppl 2:S11-7.
Kim SP, Shah ND, Karnes RJ, et al. Hospitalization costs for radical prostatectomy attributable to robotic surgery. Eur Urol 2013;64(1):11-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2012.08.012
Gawande AA, Kwaan MR, Regenbogen SE, Lipsitz SA, Zinner MJ. An Apgar score for surgery. J Am Coll Surg 2007;204(2):201-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2006.11.011
Hinkelbein J, Lamperti M, Akeson J, et al. European Society of Anaesthesiology and European Board of Anaesthesiology guidelines for procedural sedation and analgesia in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2018;35(1):6-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000000683
Horlocker TT. Complications of spinal and epidural anesthesia. Anesthesiol Clin North Am 2000;18(2):461-85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-8537(05)70172-3
Hawthorne G, Sansoni J, Hayes L, Marosszeky N, Sansoni E. Measuring patient satisfaction with health care treatment using the Short Assessment of Patient Satisfaction measure delivered superior and robust satisfaction estimates. J Clin Epidemiol 2014;67(5):527-37. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.12.010
Avery K, Donovan J, Peters TJ, Shaw C, Gotoh M, Abrams P. ICIQ: a brief and robust measure for evaluating the symptoms and impact of urinary incontinence. Neurourol Urodyn 2004;23(4):322-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.20041
Shir Y, Raja SN, Frank SM, Brendler CB. Intraoperative blood loss during radical retropubic prostatectomy: epidural versus general anesthesia. Urology 1995;45(6):993-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-4295(99)80120-4
Nanas S, Magder S. Adaptations of the peripheral circulation to PEEP. Am Rev Respir Dis 1992;146(3):688-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1164/ajrccm/146.3.688
Morgan BC, Martin WE, Hornbein TF, Crawford EW, Guntheroth WG. Hemodynamic effects of intermittent positive pressure respiration. Anesthesiology 1966;27(5):584-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00000542-196609000-00009
DiStefano VJ, Klein KS, Nixon JE, Andrews ET. Intra-operative analysis of the effects of position and body habitus on surgery of the low back. A preliminary report. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1974(99):51-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-197403000-00005
Tikuisis R, Miliauskas P, Samalavicius NE, Zurauskas A, Sruogis A. Epidural and general anesthesia versus general anesthesia in radical prostatectomy. Medicina (Kaunas) 2009;45(10):772-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina45100100
Dunet F, Pfister C, Deghmani M, Meunier Y, Demeilliers-Pfister G, Grise P. Clinical results of combined epidural and general anesthesia procedure in radical prostatectomy management. Can J Urol 2004;11(2):2200-4.
Archer S, Pinto A, Vuik S, et al. Surgery, Complications, and Quality of Life: A Longitudinal Cohort Study Exploring the Role of Psychosocial Factors. Ann Surg 2019;270(1):95-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002745
Kofler O, Prueckner S, Weninger E, et al. Anesthesia for Open Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy: A Comparison between Combined Spinal Epidural Anesthesia and Combined General Epidural Anesthesia. Prostate Cancer 2019;2019:4921620. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4921620
Gardner TA, Bissonette EA, Petroni GR, McClain R, Sokoloff MH, Theodorescu D. Surgical and postoperative factors affecting length of hospital stay after radical prostatectomy. Cancer 2000;89(2):424-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(20000715)89:2<424::AID-CNCR30>3.0.CO;2-6
Salonia A, Crescenti A, Suardi N, et al. General versus spinal anesthesia in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy: results of a prospective, randomized study. Urology 2004;64(1):95-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2004.03.010
Tsui BC, Rashiq S, Schopflocher D, et al. Epidural anesthesia and cancer recurrence rates after radical prostatectomy. Can J Anaesth 2010;57(2):107-12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-009-9214-7
Cai T, Cocci A, Di Maida F, et al. Visceral adiposity is associated with worse urinary and sexual function recovery after radical prostatectomy: Results from a longitudinal cohort study. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2021 Sep 30;93(3):285-290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2021.3.285

How to Cite

Pikramenos, K., Zachou, M., Apostolatou, E., Papadopoulos, D., Mitsogianni, M., Papatsoris, A., Varkarakis, I., & Mitsogiannis, I. (2022). The effects of method of anaesthesia on the safety and effectiveness of Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy. Archivio Italiano Di Urologia E Andrologia, 94(4), 396–400. https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2022.4.396