title: Salvage robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a single institution, 5-year experience.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  Salvage robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy is a treatment option for certain patients with recurrent prostate cancer after primary therapy. Data regarding patient selection, complication rates and cancer outcomes are scarce. We report the largest, single institution series to date, to our knowledge, of salvage robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.
  
  
  METHODS
  We reviewed our database of 4,234 patients treated with robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy at Vanderbilt University and identified 34 men who had surgery after the failure of prior definitive ablative therapy. Each patient had biopsy proven recurrent prostate cancer and no evidence of metastases. The primary outcome measure was biochemical failure.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Median time from primary therapy to salvage robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy was 48.5 months with a median preoperative prostate specific antigen of 3.86 ng/ml. Most patients had Gleason scores of 7 or greater on preoperative biopsy, although 12 (35%) had Gleason 8 or greater disease. After a median followup of 16 months 18% of patients had biochemical failure. The positive margin rate was 26%, of which 33% had biochemical failure after surgery. On univariable analysis there was a significant association between prostate specific antigen doubling time and biochemical failure (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60-0.99, p = 0.049) as well as between Gleason score at original diagnosis and biochemical failure (HR 3.49, 95% CI 1.18-10.3, p = 0.023). There were 2 Clavien II-III complications, namely a pulmonary embolism and a rectal laceration. Postoperatively 39% of patients had excellent continence.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Salvage robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy is safe, with many favorable outcomes compared to open salvage radical prostatectomy series. Advantages include superior visualization of the posterior prostatic plane, modest blood loss, low complication rates and short length of stay.
authors.affiliation: Department of Urologic Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee 37215, USA.
authors.forename: Samuel D
authors.initials: SD
authors.lastname: Kaffenberger
authors.forename: Kirk A
authors.initials: KA
authors.lastname: Keegan
authors.forename: Neil K
authors.initials: NK
authors.lastname: Bansal
authors.forename: Todd M
authors.initials: TM
authors.lastname: Morgan
authors.forename: Dominic H
authors.initials: DH
authors.lastname: Tang
authors.forename: Daniel A
authors.initials: DA
authors.lastname: Barocas
authors.forename: David F
authors.initials: DF
authors.lastname: Penson
authors.forename: Rodney
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Davis
authors.forename: Peter E
authors.initials: PE
authors.lastname: Clark
authors.forename: Sam S
authors.initials: SS
authors.lastname: Chang
authors.forename: Michael S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Cookson
authors.forename: S Duke
authors.initials: SD
authors.lastname: Herrell
authors.forename: Joseph A
authors.initials: JA
authors.lastname: Smith
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D006801:Humans; D010535:Laparoscopy; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011468:Prostatectomy / Q000379:methods*; D011471:Prostatic Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D012371:Robotics; D016879:Salvage Therapy; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome