Abstract
Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in men with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 kg/m2 is considered technically challenging. We conducted a retrospective matched-pair analysis to compare the oncological and functional outcomes of RARP in men with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. We interrogated our prospectively maintained RARP database and identified 1273 men who underwent RARP from January 2018 till June 2021. Among them, 43 had BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2, and 1230 had BMI < 35 kg/m2. A 1:1 genetic matching was performed between these two groups for PSA, Gleason grades, clinical stage, D'Amico risk stratification, and nerve-spare extent. Continence rates and biochemical rates on 1-year follow-up were analysed. We performed statistical analysis using SPSS, and Paired tests were done using Wilcoxon sign rank-sum test. p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. The two groups were comparable in almost all parameters except for age. Console time (p = 0.20) and estimated blood loss (p > 0.90) were not significantly different. There was no blood transfusion, open conversion or (Clavien–Dindo grade ≥ 3) intra/postoperative complication in either of the two groups. The two groups did not have any difference in biochemical recurrence rates (BCR) on 1-year follow-up (p > 0.90). Men with BMI ≥ 35 achieved continence rates equivalent to men with BMI < 35 within 1 year. On logistic regression analysis, age (p < 0.001) and extent of nerve sparing (p = 0.026) emerged as significant factors influencing continence recovery. RARP is safe in men with BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2. The 1-year continence and oncological outcomes are similar to matched men with BMI < 35 kg/m2 undergoing RARP.
Similar content being viewed by others
Availability of data and materials used in the study
Available on request.
References
Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A et al (2021) Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries. CA Cancer J Clin 71(3):209–249
Cancer Tomorrow [Internet]. https://gco.iarc.fr/tomorrow/en/dataviz/isotype?cancers=27&single_unit=50000&years=2040&types=1. Accessed 29 Jan 2023
Cancer Tomorrow [Internet]. https://gco.iarc.fr/tomorrow/en/dataviz/isotype?cancers=27&single_unit=500&years=2040&types=0&populations=826. Accessed 29 Jan 2023
Agha M, Agha R (2017) The rising prevalence of obesity: part A: impact on public health. Int J Surg Oncol 2(7):e17
Kadono Y, Ueno S, Makino T, Makino T, Ofude M, Izumi K et al (2014) Intrapelvic fat makes robot-assisted radical prostatectomy difficult. Anticancer Res 34(10):5523–5528
Herman MP, Raman JD, Dong S, Samadi D, Scherr DS (2007) Increasing body mass index negatively impacts outcomes following robotic radical prostatectomy. JSLS 11(4):438–442
Busch J, Gonzalgo ML, Leva N, Ferrari M, Cash H, Kempkensteffen C et al (2015) Matched comparison of robot-assisted, laparoscopic and open radical prostatectomy regarding pathologic and oncologic outcomes in obese patients. World J Urol 33(3):397–402
Khaira HS, Bruyere F, Bruyere F, Bruyère F, O’Malley PJ, O’Malley PJ et al (2006) Does obesity influence the operative course or complications of robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy. BJUI 98(6):1275–1278
Abdul-Muhsin H, Giedelman C, Samavedi S, Schatloff O, Coelho RF, Rocco B et al (2014) Perioperative and early oncological outcomes after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) in morbidly obese patients: a propensity score-matched study. BJUI 113(1):84–91
Han H, Cao Z, Qin Y, Wei X, Ruan Y, Cao Y et al (2020) Morbid obesity is adversely associated with perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy. Can Urol Assoc J 14(11):E574–E581
Vineet A, Agrawal V, Changyong F, Feng C, Jean J, Joseph JV (2014) Outcomes of extra-peritoneal robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in the morbidly obese: a propensity score-matched study. J Endourol 29(6):677–682
Yates J, Munver R, Sawczuk I (2011) Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in the morbidly obese patient. Prostate Cancer 2011:618623
Sekhon JS (2011) Multivariate and propensity score matching software with automated balance optimisation: the matching package for R. J Stat Softw 14(42):1–52
Ho D, Imai K, King G, Stuart EA (2011) MatchIt: nonparametric preprocessing for parametric causal inference. J Stat Softw 14(42):1–28
R: The R Project for Statistical Computing [Internet]. https://www.r-project.org/. Accessed 17 Feb 2022
Hu M, Xu H, Bai PD, Jiang H, Ding Q (2014) Obesity has multifaceted impact on biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of 36,927 patients. Med Oncol 31(2):829–829
Rivera-Izquierdo M, Pérez de Rojas J, Martínez-Ruiz V, Pérez-Gómez B, Sánchez MJ, Khan KS et al (2021) Obesity as a risk factor for prostate cancer mortality: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of 280,199 patients. Cancers 13(16):4169
Choban PS, Flancbaum L (1997) The impact of obesity on surgical outcomes: a review. J Am Coll Surg 185(6):593–603
Kopp RP, Han M, Partin AW, Humphreys E, Freedland SJ, Parsons JK (2011) Obesity and prostate enlargement in men with localised prostate cancer. BJU Int 108(11):1750–1755
Parikesit D, Mochtar CA, Umbas R, Hamid ARAH (2016) The impact of obesity towards prostate diseases. Prostate Int 4(1):1–6
Chughtai B, Lee R, Te A, Kaplan S (2011) Role of Inflammation in Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia. Rev Urol 13(3):147–150
Kaaks R, Stattin P (2010) Obesity, endogenous hormone metabolism, and prostate cancer risk: a conundrum of “highs” and “lows.” Cancer Prev Res Phila Pa 3(3):259–262
Shapiro DD, Davis JW, Williams WH, Chapin BF, Ward JF, Pettaway CA et al (2022) Increased body mass index is associated with operative difficulty during robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. BJUI Compass 3(1):68–74
Crocitto LE, Ly M, Satterthwaite R, Wilson T, Nelson RA (2008) Can robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy be recommended to obese patients? J Robot Surg 1(4):297–302
Goßler C, May M, Rosenhammer B, Breyer J, Stojanoski G, Weikert S et al (2020) Obesity leads to a higher rate of positive surgical margins in the context of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Results of a prospective multicenter study. Cent Eur J Urol. 73(4):457–465
Jayachandran J, Aronson WJ, Terris MK, Presti JC, Amling CL, SEARCH Database Study Group et al (2008) obesity and positive surgical margins by anatomic location after radical prostatectomy: results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database. BJU Int 102(8):964–968
Ramahi EH, Ansley KC, Jackson MW, Basler JW, Du F, Swanson GP (2012) Positive surgical margins and biochemical recurrence in obese patients with intermediate- and high-grade prostate cancer with radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 30(5_suppl):50–50
Suh J, Yoo S, Park J, Cho MC, Jeong CW, Ku JH et al (2020) Differences in risk factors for biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy stratified by the degree of obesity: focused on surgical methods. Sci Rep 10(1):10157
Mourão TC, de Oliveira RAR, de Favaretto RL, Santana TBM, Sacomani CAR, Bachega W et al (2022) Should obesity be associated with worse urinary continence outcomes after robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy a propensity score matching analysis. Int Braz J Urol Off J Braz Soc Urol 48(1):122–130
Wei Y, Wu YP, Lin MY, Chen SH, Lin YZ, Li XD et al (2018) Impact of obesity on long-term urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy: a meta-analysis. BioMed Res Int 3(2018):8279523
Hao H, Liu Y, Chen YK, Si LM, Zhang M, Fan Y et al (2021) Evaluating continence recovery time after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao 53(4):697–703
Gondoputro W, Thompson J, Evans M, Bolton D, Frydenberg M, Murphy DG et al (2022) How does age affect urinary continence following robot-assisted radical prostatectomy? A prospective multi-institutional study using independently collected Validated Questionnaires. J Urol 207(5):1048–1056
Sadri I, Arezki A, Zakaria AS, Couture F, Nguyen DD, Bousmaha N et al (2022) Age-stratified continence outcomes of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. Can J Urol 29(5):11292–11299
Funding
No funding was received for conducting the study.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by DDC. The first draft of the manuscript was written by DDC and all the other authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
All the authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethical clearance
This retrospective study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was performed as an audit of obese men who underwent RARP in our unit. Audit number:SU-CA-21-22-104.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Carbin Joseph, D.D., Dranova, S., Harrison, H. et al. Functional and oncological outcomes of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in obese men: a matched-pair analysis. J Robotic Surg 17, 2027–2033 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01607-w
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11701-023-01607-w