Literature DB >> 15357040

Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy.

Mitchell R Humphreys1, Matthew T Gettman, George K Chow, Horst Zincke, Michael L Blute.   

Abstract

The development of advanced laparoscopic techniques and robot-assisted technology has resulted in several new surgical approaches for treating organ-confined prostate cancer. Outcomes with these new or minimally Invasive techniques should be assessed carefully to ensure that they are similar to or surpass patients' oncologic and functional outcomes after open radical prostatectomy. This article reviews the current published experience with minimally Invasive approaches to increase awareness about viability. Several of the larger series of patients who have undergone laparoscopic (transperitoneal and extraperitoneal) or robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomies are discussed and evaluated critically. Comparisons to published data on open radical prostatectomy are included for completeness. The different minimally invasive techniques are described and contrasted in regard to prostate-specific antigen progression-free survival, surgical margin status, blood loss, transfusion rates, postoperative pain, length of hospitalization, duration of urinary catheterization, potency, continence, and complications. The relative costs of each method are provided. The coexistence of multiple surgical approaches should and can challenge surgeons who perform open and minimally invasive procedures to strive for a new standard of care above and beyond what is accepted today to minimize patient morbidity while maximizing functional and oncologic outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15357040     DOI: 10.4065/79.9.1169

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc        ISSN: 0025-6196            Impact factor:   7.616


  5 in total

Review 1.  Critical comparison of laparoscopic, robotic, and open radical prostatectomy: techniques, outcomes, and cost.

Authors:  Matthew T Gettman; Michael L Blute
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 3.092

2.  Assessment of low prostate weight as a determinant of a higher positive margin rate after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a prospective pathologic study of 1,500 cases.

Authors:  Peiguo G Chu; Sean K Lau; Lawrence M Weiss; Mark Kawachi; Jeffrey Yoshida; Christopher Ruel; Rebecca Nelson; Laura Crocitto; Timothy Wilson
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2008-09-24       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Current Challenges in Prostate Cancer Management and the Rationale behind Targeted Focal Therapy.

Authors:  Al B Barqawi; Kevin J Krughoff; Khadijah Eid
Journal:  Adv Urol       Date:  2012-05-10

4.  Safe removal of the urethral catheter 2 days following laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Philip James; Anthony Glackin; Alan Doherty
Journal:  ISRN Oncol       Date:  2012-08-17

5.  Radical perineal prostatectomy - the contemporary resurgence of a genuinely minimally invasive procedure: Procedure outline. Comparison of the advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes of different surgical techniques of treating organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa). A literature review with special focus on perineal prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stanisław Wroński
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2012-09-04
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.