OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of barbed suture (BS) compared with conventional sutures for vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA) during minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: Relevant studies comparing the safety and efficacy of BS with conventional sutures during minimally invasive RP were identified through a literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. The outcome measures included baseline characteristics, primary outcomes, and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Ten studies (378 cases and 369 controls) were included. No significant differences between the 2 groups were detected in any of the baseline variables except for age (P = .02). The BS group had a shorter operation time (mean difference [MD], 10.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], -14.38 to -6.69; P <.01), a shorter VUA time (MD, -5.35; 95% CI, -7.44 to -3.25; P <.01), and a shorter posterior reconstruction time (MD, -0.56; 95% CI, -1.10 to -0.02; P = .04) than those in the conventional sutures group. No significant differences were detected between the 2 groups in other outcomes of interest. In subgroup and sensitivity analyses, there was no change in the significance of any of the outcomes. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicates that VUA using BS as opposed to conventional suture is associated with a shorter operative time, comparable postoperative complication rate, and convenience for manipulation, which is of benefit to the surgeon learning robot-assisted RP and laparoscopic RP. Given that the inherent limitations, future well-designed randomized controlled trials are required to confirm our findings.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of barbed suture (BS) compared with conventional sutures for vesicourethral anastomosis (VUA) during minimally invasive radical prostatectomy (RP). METHODS: Relevant studies comparing the safety and efficacy of BS with conventional sutures during minimally invasive RP were identified through a literature search using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. The outcome measures included baseline characteristics, primary outcomes, and secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Ten studies (378 cases and 369 controls) were included. No significant differences between the 2 groups were detected in any of the baseline variables except for age (P = .02). The BS group had a shorter operation time (mean difference [MD], 10.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], -14.38 to -6.69; P <.01), a shorter VUA time (MD, -5.35; 95% CI, -7.44 to -3.25; P <.01), and a shorter posterior reconstruction time (MD, -0.56; 95% CI, -1.10 to -0.02; P = .04) than those in the conventional sutures group. No significant differences were detected between the 2 groups in other outcomes of interest. In subgroup and sensitivity analyses, there was no change in the significance of any of the outcomes. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis indicates that VUA using BS as opposed to conventional suture is associated with a shorter operative time, comparable postoperative complication rate, and convenience for manipulation, which is of benefit to the surgeon learning robot-assisted RP and laparoscopic RP. Given that the inherent limitations, future well-designed randomized controlled trials are required to confirm our findings.