Incidence of Rectal Injury After Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

• Published in: European urology open science (Online) Vol. 52; pp. 85 - 99
• Main Authors: Romito, Ilaria, Giannarini, Gianluca, Rossanese, Marta, Mucciardi, Giuseppe, Simonato, Alchiede, Ficarra, Vincenzo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Netherlands Elsevier B.V 01.06.2023; Elsevier
• Subjects: Complications; Prostate cancer; Radical prostatectomy; Rectal injury; Review – Prostate Cancer; Systematic review; Rectal injury; Systematic review; Radical prostatectomy; Complications; Prostate cancer
• ISSN: 2666-1683; 2666-1691; 2666-1683
• DOI: 10.1016/j.euros.2023.03.017

Rectal injury is a rare, but potentially devastating, complication following radical prostatectomy. Its incidence is higher in patients ≥60 yr of age, and in those undergoing open/laparoscopic versus robotic prostatectomy or salvage prostatectomy after radiation therapy. Intraoperative detection and repair constitute the most critical step to decrease the risk of severe postoperative complications including rectourethral fistula. Rectal injury (RI) is a dreaded complication after radical prostatectomy (RP), increasing the risk of early postoperative complications, such as bleeding and severe infection/sepsis, and late sequelae, such as a rectourethral fistula (RUF). Considering its traditionally low incidence, uncertainty remains as to predisposing risk factors and management. To examine the incidence of RI after RP in contemporary series and to propose a pragmatic algorithm for its management. A systematic literature search was performed using the Medline and Scopus databases. Studies reporting data on RI incidence were selected. Subgroup analyses were conducted to assess the differential incidence by age, surgical approach, salvage RP after radiation therapy, and previous benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH)-related surgery. Eighty-eight, mostly retrospective noncomparative, studies were selected. The meta-analysis obtained a pooled RI incidence of 0.58% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46–0.73) in contemporary series with significant across-study heterogeneity (I2 = 100%, p < 0.00001). The highest RI incidence was found in patients undergoing open RP (1.25%; 95% CI 0.66–2.38) and laparoscopic RP (1.25%; 95% CI 0.75–2.08) followed by perineal RP (0.19%; 95% CI 0–276.95) and robotic RP (0.08%; 95% CI 0.02–0.31). Age ≥60 yr (0.56%; 95% CI 0.37–06) and salvage RP after radiation therapy (6.01%; 95% CI 3.99–9.05), but not previous BPH-related surgery (4.08%, 95% CI 0.92–18.20), were also associated with an increased RI incidence. Intraoperative versus postoperative RI detection was associated with a significantly decreased risk of severe postoperative complications (such as sepsis and bleeding) and subsequent formation of a RUF. RI is a rare, but potentially devastating, complication following RP. RI incidence was higher in patients ≥60 yr of age, and in those who underwent open/laparoscopic approach or salvage RP after radiation therapy. Intraoperative RI detection and repair apparently constitute the single most critical step to significantly decrease the risk of major postoperative complications and subsequent RUF formation. Conversely, intraoperatively undetected RI can lead more often to severe infective complications and RUF, the management of which remains poorly standardised and requires complex procedures. Accidental rectum tear is a rare, but potentially devastating, complication in men undergoing prostate removal for cancer. It occurs more often in patients aged 60 yr or older as well as in those who underwent prostate removal via an open/laparoscopic approach and/or prostate removal after radiation therapy for recurrent disease. Prompt identification and repair of this condition during the initial operation are the key to reduce further complications such as the formation of an abnormal opening between the rectum and the urinary tract.