Literature DB >> 15183547

Comparison of early oncologic results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by extraperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach.

Leticia Ruiz1, Laurent Salomon, András Hoznek, Dimitrios Vordos, René Yiou, Alexandre de la Taille, Clément-Claude Abbou.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Compare the early oncological results of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy performed by either an extraperitoneal or a transperitoneal approach.
METHODS: 330 consecutive men underwent laparoscopic radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer, the first 165 by transperitoneal approach, and the last 165 by extraperitoneal approach. Clinical stage, serum PSA, Gleason score of biopsy were recorded, as well as operating time, surgical and medical complications, blood loss, length of hospital stay and catheterization time. The weight of the specimen, pathological stage (1997 TNM classification) and status of the surgical margins were noted. The Fisher test as well as the chi2-test were used for statistical analysis. Differences were considered significant when p < 0.05.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of preoperative characteristics except for Gleason score of the biopsies which was higher in the extraperitoneal group (p < 0.0001). The operating time was longer with the transperitoneal approach (248.5 min vs. 220.0 min, p < 0.0001). There was no difference in transfusion rate (1.2% vs. 5.4%, transperitoneal vs. extraperitoneal, respectively, p = 0.6). There was no difference in hospital stay, medical and surgical complications. Respectively, in the transperitoneal and extraperitoneal groups, there were 108 and 88 pT2 tumors. There were no differences in terms of positive surgical margins between the two groups, 23% and 29.7% (p = 0.21) overall, 13.0% and 17.0% (p = 0.42) in pT2 tumors and 43.6% and 44.7% (p = 0.99) in pT3 tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: Extraperitoneal approach offers the same early oncological results as transperitoneal approach with a shorter operative time. Copyright 2004 Elsevier B.V.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15183547     DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2004.04.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Urol        ISSN: 0302-2838            Impact factor:   20.096


  11 in total

Review 1.  Evolution of endoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy (EERPE): technique and outcome.

Authors:  Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg; Odysseas Andrikopoulos; Panagiotis Kallidonis; Iason Kyriazis; Minh Do; Evangelos Liatsikos
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-12-19       Impact factor: 3.285

2.  Open versus laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Herbert Lepor
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2005

Review 3.  Robot-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Francois Rozet; Justin Harmon; Xavier Cathelineau; Eric Barret; Guy Vallancien
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2006-03-17       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 4.  Prevention and management of perioperative complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Evangelos Liatsikos; Robert Rabenalt; Martin Burchardt; Miguel-Ramirez Backhaus; Minh Do; Anja Dietel; Johanna Wasserscheid; Costantinos Constantinides; Panagiotis Kallidonis; Michael C Truss; Thomas R Herrmann; Roman Ganzer; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2008-09-10       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  The learning curve for surgical margins after open radical prostatectomy: implications for margin status as an oncological end point.

Authors:  Andrew Vickers; Fernando Bianco; Angel Cronin; James Eastham; Eric Klein; Michael Kattan; Peter Scardino
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Michael Lipke; Chandru P Sundaram
Journal:  J Minim Access Surg       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.407

Review 7.  Critical appraisal of literature comparing minimally invasive extraperitoneal and transperitoneal radical prostatectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Panagiotis Kallidonis; Bhavan Prasad Rai; Hasan Qazi; Roman Ganzer; Minh Do; Anja Dietel; Evangelos Liatsikos; Nabi Ghulam; Iason Kyriazis; Jens-Uwe Stolzenburg
Journal:  Arab J Urol       Date:  2017-08-31

8.  A comparison of perioperative outcome between robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: experience of a single institution.

Authors:  Feng Qi; Shangqian Wang; Haoxiang Xu; Yiren Gao; Gong Cheng; Lixin Hua
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2019 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.541

9.  Comparison of efficacy and safety of conventional laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal procedure.

Authors:  Cao De Hong; Liu Liang Ren; Wei Qiang; Wang Jia; Hu Ying Chun; Yang Lu; Liu Zheng Hua; Li Heng Ping; Yan Shi Bing; Li Yun Xiang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 4.379

10.  Clavien System Classification of Complications Developed following Laparoscopic Urological Operations Applied in our Clinic.

Authors:  Çetin Demirdağ; Sinharib Çitgez; Can Öbek
Journal:  Sisli Etfal Hastan Tip Bul       Date:  2019-08-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.