MP15-11 OUTCOMES OF SALVAGE ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY (S-RARP) POST FOCAL ABLATION FOR PROSTATE CANCER IN COMPARISON WITH PRIMARY ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY (RARP); A MATCHED ANALYSIS

You have accessJournal of UrologyCME1 May 2022MP15-11 OUTCOMES OF SALVAGE ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY (S-RARP) POST FOCAL ABLATION FOR PROSTATE CANCER IN COMPARISON WITH PRIMARY ROBOT-ASSISTED RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY (RARP); A MATCHED ANALYSIS Seetharam Bhat, Marcio Covas Moschovas, Jonathan Noel, Travis Rogers, Roshane Pereira, Sunil Reddy, Vipul Patel, and Marco Sandri Seetharam BhatSeetharam Bhat More articles by this author , Marcio Covas MoschovasMarcio Covas Moschovas More articles by this author , Jonathan NoelJonathan Noel More articles by this author , Travis RogersTravis Rogers More articles by this author , Roshane PereiraRoshane Pereira More articles by this author , Sunil ReddySunil Reddy More articles by this author , Vipul PatelVipul Patel More articles by this author , and Marco SandriMarco Sandri More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000002544.11AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail Abstract INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of focal therapy on functional and oncological outcomesfollowing RARP. METHODS: 53 patients who had prostatectomy following the failure of focal ablation were selected and labeled group I. The patients who had whole gland ablation and external beam therapy were excluded. They were then compared to a matched control sample of the ratio of 1:1, 1:2, 1:3 with the RARP cohort. Age, PSA, PSA density, BMI, SHIM, AUA, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Prostate weight, Preoperative Gleason score, and history of Smoking were used to perform matching. The oncological and functional outcomes between these groups were compared.SRARP following focal therapy was performed in all cases using a standardized technique developed at our institute with the da Vinci Xi Surgical System. RESULTS: No difference in EBL and OR time was noted between the focal and control group. More full NS was performed in the control group compared to the focal group. The focal therapy group had a higher incidence of the positive surgical margin. Also, the focal therapy group had a higher incidence of GS >=8 and positive lymph node status. The focal therapy group had a higher incidence of lymphocele drainage post-surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Salvage robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy after focal therapy failure is feasiblehowever, surgery following focal therapy leads to poorer oncological and functional outcomes.Despite the targeted nature of FT, significant non-focal collateral damage is seen to tissuessurrounding the prostate, which in turn translates to poorer functional outcomes post salvageRARP. Source of Funding: None © 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 207Issue Supplement 5May 2022Page: e245 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2022 by American Urological Association Education and Research, Inc.MetricsAuthor Information Seetharam Bhat More articles by this author Marcio Covas Moschovas More articles by this author Jonathan Noel More articles by this author Travis Rogers More articles by this author Roshane Pereira More articles by this author Sunil Reddy More articles by this author Vipul Patel More articles by this author Marco Sandri More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...