OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a standard vertical laparotomy versus a Pfannenstiel transverse laparotomy on intra-, peri-operative, and 6-month follow-up outcome in patients undergoingradical retropubic prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy with spinal anesthesia. METHODS:Between January 2003 and June 2003, 69 age-matched consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer underwentradical retropubic prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy with spinal anesthesia and were randomized into Group 1 (vertical laparotomy: 35 patients) and Group 2 (Pfannenstiel laparotomy: 34 patients). An extensive analysis of the critical intra-, peri-operative, and 6-month follow-up clinical parameters was performed. RESULTS: Both the hemodynamics and the biochemical balance were not significantly different between the two groups. Overall blood loss (p = 0.78), autologous (p = 0.88) and homologous (p = 0.36) blood transfusions were similar regardless of the type of laparotomy. Surgical time was not significantly (p = 0.27) different between the two groups. Similarly, the two forms of laparotomy did not differ regarding the length of the surgical incision (p = 0.21), as measured at the end of the procedure. Post-operative oxygen saturation percentage by pulse oximetry, as well as post-op sedation score, were not significantly different (p = 0.06 and p = 0.97, respectively). Waiting time in the post-operative holding area (p = 0.15), and pain score in the post-operative holding area (p = 0.9) as well as on post-operative day 1 (p = 0.1) were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of first flatus passage and of unassisted ambulation were similar regardless of the type of laparotomy during post-operative day day 1. The two types of incision made it possible to remove a similar (p = 0.34) number of pelvic lymph nodes and were associated to a similar rate of positive surgical margins among pT2 patients. At the 6-month follow-up the occurrence of a pelvic lymphocele and of deep venous thrombosis was similar in the two groups (p = 0.6 and p = 0.16, respectively). Complete urinary continence and spontaneous erectile function recovery was reported in a similar number of patients regardless of the type of surgical incision (p = 0.59 and p = 0.40, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that a Pfannenstiel transverse suprapubic laparotomy does not result in a significantly different outcome from a standard vertical laparotomy in patients undergoing a radical retropubic prostatectomy withpelvic lymphadenectomy with L2-L3 spinal anesthesia for clinically localized prostate cancer.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of a standard vertical laparotomy versus a Pfannenstiel transverse laparotomy on intra-, peri-operative, and 6-month follow-up outcome in patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy with spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Between January 2003 and June 2003, 69 age-matched consecutive patients with clinically localized prostate cancer underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy with spinal anesthesia and were randomized into Group 1 (vertical laparotomy: 35 patients) and Group 2 (Pfannenstiel laparotomy: 34 patients). An extensive analysis of the critical intra-, peri-operative, and 6-month follow-up clinical parameters was performed. RESULTS: Both the hemodynamics and the biochemical balance were not significantly different between the two groups. Overall blood loss (p = 0.78), autologous (p = 0.88) and homologous (p = 0.36) blood transfusions were similar regardless of the type of laparotomy. Surgical time was not significantly (p = 0.27) different between the two groups. Similarly, the two forms of laparotomy did not differ regarding the length of the surgical incision (p = 0.21), as measured at the end of the procedure. Post-operative oxygen saturation percentage by pulse oximetry, as well as post-op sedation score, were not significantly different (p = 0.06 and p = 0.97, respectively). Waiting time in the post-operative holding area (p = 0.15), and pain score in the post-operative holding area (p = 0.9) as well as on post-operative day 1 (p = 0.1) were not significantly different between the two groups. The rate of first flatus passage and of unassisted ambulation were similar regardless of the type of laparotomy during post-operative day day 1. The two types of incision made it possible to remove a similar (p = 0.34) number of pelvic lymph nodes and were associated to a similar rate of positive surgical margins among pT2 patients. At the 6-month follow-up the occurrence of a pelvic lymphocele and of deep venous thrombosis was similar in the two groups (p = 0.6 and p = 0.16, respectively). Complete urinary continence and spontaneous erectile function recovery was reported in a similar number of patients regardless of the type of surgical incision (p = 0.59 and p = 0.40, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that a Pfannenstiel transverse suprapubic laparotomy does not result in a significantly different outcome from a standard vertical laparotomy in patients undergoing a radical retropubic prostatectomy with pelvic lymphadenectomy with L2-L3 spinal anesthesia for clinically localized prostate cancer.
Authors: Bruce R Kava; Rajinikanth Ayyathurai; Cynthia T Soloway; Miguel Suarez; Prashanth Kanagarajah; Manoharan Murugesan Journal: Indian J Urol Date: 2010-07