Advertisement

Contemporary Management of Hemorrhage After Minimally Invasive Radical Prostatectomy

      ABSTRACT

      Objective

      To describe contemporary management and outcomes of patients experiencing postoperative hemorrhage after minimally invasive radical prostatectomy.

      Materials and Methods

      We retrospectively analyzed data from patients who underwent minimally invasive radical prostatectomy at our institution between January 2010 and January 2017. Clinically significant hemorrhage was defined as a decrease in hemoglobin of ≥30% or 4 g/dL from preoperative to 4 or 14 hours postoperative measurement, receiving a blood transfusion within 30 days, or undergoing a secondary procedure to control bleeding. Patients were analyzed in 3 groups: (1) serially monitored only, (2) received a blood transfusion, and (3) underwent a secondary procedure. Outcomes included imaging studies performed, length of stay, emergency room visits, hospital readmissions, complication rates, and functional outcomes.

      Results

      Of 3749 men, 4% (151/3749) had clinically significant hemorrhage, 1.6% (60/3749) received a transfusion; 0.32% (12/3749) underwent a secondary procedure to control bleeding. In a 30-day composite outcome, increased healthcare utilization (emergency room visit, readmission, or Grade ≥3 complications), was seen in 25% of the serial monitoring group, 65% of the transfusion group, and 100% in the secondary procedure group. This rate in 3598 men without hemorrhage was 12.5%. One-year erectile function was poorest in men who underwent a secondary procedure. Urinary functional outcomes were similar in the 3 groups.

      Conclusion

      Most patients experiencing clinically significant hemorrhage will stabilize without transfusion, and a very small fraction require secondary intervention. Patients experiencing milder bleeding events utilized additional healthcare resources at approximately twice the rate of those who did not, warranting appropriate counseling and postoperative monitoring.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Urology
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Oberlin D.T.
        • Flum A.S.
        • Lai J.D.
        • et al.
        The effect of minimally invasive prostatectomy on practice patterns of American urologists.
        Urol Oncol. 2016; 34: (255 e1-255.e5)
        • Novara G.
        • Ficarra V.
        • Rosen R.C.
        • et al.
        Systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes and complications after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.
        Eur Urol. 2012; 62: 431-452
        • Tewari A.
        • Sooriakumaran P.
        • Bloch D.A.
        • et al.
        Positive surgical margin and perioperative complication rates of primary surgical treatments for prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing retropubic, laparoscopic, and robotic prostatectomy.
        Eur Urol. 2012; 62: 1-15
        • Hedican S.P.
        • Walsh P.C.
        Postoperative bleeding following radical retropubic prostatectomy.
        J Urol. 1994; 152: 1181-1183
        • Liatsikos E.
        • Rabenalt R.
        • Burchardt M.
        • et al.
        Prevention and management of perioperative complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic radical prostatectomy.
        World J Urol. 2008; 26: 571-580
        • Guillonneau B.
        • Rozet F.
        • Cathelineau X.
        • et al.
        Perioperative complications of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: the Montsouris 3-year experience.
        J Urol. 2002; 167: 51-56
        • Bonne L.
        • Gillardin P.
        • De Wever L.
        • et al.
        Endovascular management of severe arterial haemorrhage after radical prostatectomy: a case series.
        Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2017; 40: 1698-1705
        • Cheng S.
        • Xu L.
        • Li G.
        • et al.
        Superselective internal iliac arterial embolization for severe hemorrhage following radical prostatectomy.
        Oncol Lett. 2012; 4: 521-523
        • Hiroshige T.
        • Matsuo M.
        • Ueda K.
        • et al.
        Transarterial embolization for pelvic hematoma following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a case report and review of the literature.
        Oncol Lett. 2015; 10: 1889-1892
        • Dindo D.
        • Demartines N.
        • Clavien P.-A.
        Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.
        Ann Surg. 2004; 240: 205-213
        • Rosen R.C.
        • Cappelleri J.C.
        • Gendrano N.
        The International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF): a state-of-the-science review.
        Int J Impot Res. 2002; 14: 226-244
        • Vickers A.J.
        • Savage C.J.
        • Shouery M.
        • et al.
        Validation study of a web-based assessment of functional recovery after radical prostatectomy.
        Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2010; 8: 82-89
        • Kaufman J.D.
        • Lepor H.
        Reoperation versus observation in men with major bleeding after radical retropubic prostatectomy.
        Urology. 2005; 66: 561-565
        • Gong E.M.
        • Zorn K.C.
        • Gofrit O.N.
        • et al.
        Early laparoscopic management of acute postoperative hemorrhage after initial laparoscopic surgery.
        J Endourol. 2007; 21: 872-878
        • Bhayani S.B.
        • Link R.E.
        • Makarov D.V.
        • et al.
        Exploration for hemorrhage following laparoscopic renal surgery: intraoperative findings.
        J Urol. 2006; 175: 2137-2139
        • Cagiannos I.
        • Karakiewicz P.
        • Eastham J.A.
        • et al.
        A preoperative nomogram identifying decreased risk of positive pelvic lymph nodes in patients with prostate cancer.
        J Urol. 2003; 170: 1798-1803
        • Mohler J.L.
        • Lee R.J.
        • Antonarakis E.S.
        • et al.
        NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Prostate Cancer. Version 4.
        2018 (Accessed March 6, 2019To view the most recent version of these guidelines, visit)
        • Strong V.E.
        • Selby L.V.
        • Sovel M.
        • et al.
        Development and assessment of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center's Surgical Secondary Events grading system.
        Ann Surg Oncol. 2015; 22: 1061-1067
        • Chamsy D.J.
        • Louie M.Y.
        • Lum D.A.
        • et al.
        Clinical utility of postoperative hemoglobin level testing following total laparoscopic hysterectomy.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014; 211 (e1-7): 224
        • Yoon G.H.
        • Stein J.
        • Skinner D.G.
        Management of intraoperative complications in open procedures.
        in: Hohenfeller M Santucci R.A. Emergencies in Urology. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Germany2007: 313-326