{"title":"Saline-assisted Fascial Exposure Microultrasound-guided Nerve Preservation During Robotic Prostatectomy: Interim Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Adriana M Pedraza, Monali Fatterpekar, Himanshu Joshi, Manish Choudhary, Coskun Kacagan, Asher Mandel, Chahat Arora, Neeraja Tillu, Murilo De Almeida Luz, Cristina Pasat-Karasik, Ashutosh Maheshwari, Raghav Gupta, Mani Menon, Ashutosh K Tewari","doi":"10.1016/j.euo.2026.07.015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Erectile dysfunction remains a major morbidity after radical prostatectomy. The SAFE technique uses real-time, micro-ultrasound-guided low-pressure hydrodissection to enable atraumatic nerve sparing.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We compared functional and oncologic outcomes of SAFE versus standard robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this randomized trial, patients were assigned 1:1 to micro-ultrasound-guided SAFE-RARP or standard RARP. Surgeons were unblinded; patients and outcome assessors were blinded.</p><p><strong>Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: </strong>The primary endpoint was erectile function recovery at 6 mo (SHIM ≥17), with secondary functional and oncologic outcomes. The primary endpoint was assessed at the prespecified interim analysis using a one-sided pooled z-test within a group-sequential O'Brien-Fleming α-spending framework (interim efficacy boundary, one-sided p < 0.002).</p><p><strong>Results and limitations: </strong>A total of 107 patients were analyzed (SAFE, n = 54; control, n = 53). At 6 mo, erectile function recovery was higher with SAFE than with standard RARP (52% vs 43%; absolute difference 8.5%, 95% CI -10% to 27%; one-sided p = 0.22), without crossing the prespecified interim efficacy boundary. At 6 weeks, early recovery rates were higher with SAFE (37% vs 21%; one-sided p = 0.032), with a smaller difference at 3 mo. Linear mixed-effects modeling showed earlier improvement in SHIM with SAFE, with convergence by 6 mo. Continence, oncologic outcomes, and complication rates were similar between groups. Limitations include the prespecified interim nature of the analysis, the relatively small sample size, and the need for longer follow-up to determine the durability and clinical significance of functional differences.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this prespecified interim analysis, the primary endpoint of 6-mo recovery was not met. Exploratory analyses suggested earlier postoperative recovery with SAFE, without evidence of compromised safety or oncologic outcomes; these findings are hypothesis-generating.</p>","PeriodicalId":12256,"journal":{"name":"European urology oncology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European urology oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euo.2026.07.015","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Erectile dysfunction remains a major morbidity after radical prostatectomy. The SAFE technique uses real-time, micro-ultrasound-guided low-pressure hydrodissection to enable atraumatic nerve sparing.
Objective: We compared functional and oncologic outcomes of SAFE versus standard robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP).
Design, setting, and participants: In this randomized trial, patients were assigned 1:1 to micro-ultrasound-guided SAFE-RARP or standard RARP. Surgeons were unblinded; patients and outcome assessors were blinded.
Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary endpoint was erectile function recovery at 6 mo (SHIM ≥17), with secondary functional and oncologic outcomes. The primary endpoint was assessed at the prespecified interim analysis using a one-sided pooled z-test within a group-sequential O'Brien-Fleming α-spending framework (interim efficacy boundary, one-sided p < 0.002).
Results and limitations: A total of 107 patients were analyzed (SAFE, n = 54; control, n = 53). At 6 mo, erectile function recovery was higher with SAFE than with standard RARP (52% vs 43%; absolute difference 8.5%, 95% CI -10% to 27%; one-sided p = 0.22), without crossing the prespecified interim efficacy boundary. At 6 weeks, early recovery rates were higher with SAFE (37% vs 21%; one-sided p = 0.032), with a smaller difference at 3 mo. Linear mixed-effects modeling showed earlier improvement in SHIM with SAFE, with convergence by 6 mo. Continence, oncologic outcomes, and complication rates were similar between groups. Limitations include the prespecified interim nature of the analysis, the relatively small sample size, and the need for longer follow-up to determine the durability and clinical significance of functional differences.
Conclusions: In this prespecified interim analysis, the primary endpoint of 6-mo recovery was not met. Exploratory analyses suggested earlier postoperative recovery with SAFE, without evidence of compromised safety or oncologic outcomes; these findings are hypothesis-generating.
期刊介绍:
Journal Name: European Urology Oncology
Affiliation: Official Journal of the European Association of Urology
Focus:
First official publication of the EAU fully devoted to the study of genitourinary malignancies
Aims to deliver high-quality research
Content:
Includes original articles, opinion piece editorials, and invited reviews
Covers clinical, basic, and translational research
Publication Frequency: Six times a year in electronic format