Literature DB >> 16544167

Robot-assisted versus pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Francois Rozet1, Justin Harmon, Xavier Cathelineau, Eric Barret, Guy Vallancien.   

Abstract

The aim of this study is to report the relative advantages and disadvantages of the radical prostatectomy with a laparoscopic (LRP) and a robotic (RALP) approach. A medline search was performed. Published data regarding perioperative parameters, complications, oncological results, functional results were analyzed. Shorter learning curves have been reported with the RALP. Intra-operative and post-operative outcomes appear to be comparable between the two approaches. The average time for LRP is 234 min (151-453) versus 182 min (141-250) for RALP. Estimated blood loss for the LRP averages 482 ml (185-850) versus 234 ml (75-500) for the RALP. Complication rates in single institution studies are similar. Long-term outcomes data on PSA progression is not yet available for LRP or RALP due to their relatively short existence. RALP appears to offer a significant benefit to the laparoscopically naïve surgeon with respect to learning curve when compared to LRP. This, however, comes at an increased cost. Intra-operative and post-operative outcomes appear to be similar. Longer follow-up data is necessary to compare oncological and functional outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16544167     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-006-0065-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  56 in total

1.  Radical prostatectomy: a prospective comparison of oncological and functional results between open and laparoscopic approaches.

Authors:  Thierry Roumeguere; Renaud Bollens; Marc Vanden Bossche; Dan Rochet; David Bialek; Paul Hoffman; Thierry Quackels; Amir Damoun; Eric Wespes; Claude C Schulman; Alexandre R Zlotta
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2003-04-03       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Transperitoneal or extraperitoneal approach for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a false debate over a real challenge.

Authors:  X Cathelineau; D Cahill; H Widmer; F Rozet; H Baumert; G Vallancien
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 3.  Establishing a robotics program.

Authors:  William D Steers; Sam LeBeau; Joseph Cardella; Brant Fulmer
Journal:  Urol Clin North Am       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 2.241

4.  Laparoscopic extraperitoneal radical prostatectomy--learning curve of a laparoscopy-naive urologist in a community hospital.

Authors:  G R Martina; P Giumelli; S Scuzzarella; M Remotti; G Caruso; J Lovisolo
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 2.649

5.  The impact of prostate size in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  C M Chang; D Moon; T R Gianduzzo; C G Eden
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 20.096

6.  Robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus retropubic radical prostatectomy: a prospective assessment of postoperative pain.

Authors:  Todd M Webster; S Duke Herrell; Sam S Chang; Michael S Cookson; Roxelyn G Baumgartner; Laura W Anderson; Joseph A Smith
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 7.450

7.  Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: technical and early oncological assessment of 40 operations.

Authors:  B Guillonneau; X Cathelineau; E Barret; F Rozet; G Vallancien
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 20.096

8.  Radical prostatectomy by the retropubic, perineal and laparoscopic approach: 12 years of experience in one center.

Authors:  Laurent Salomon; Olivier Levrel; Alexandre de la Taille; Aristotelis G Anastasiadis; Fabien Saint; Safawat Zaki; Dimitrios Vordos; Antony Cicco; L Eric Olsson; Andras Hoznek; Dominique Chopin; Clement-Claude Abbou
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 20.096

9.  Feasibility and usefulness of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Kobe University experience.

Authors:  Isao Hara; Gaku Kawabata; Hideaki Miyake; Shoji Hara; Masato Fujisawa; Hiroshi Okada; Soichi Arakawa; Sadao Kamidono
Journal:  Int J Urol       Date:  2002-11       Impact factor: 3.369

10.  Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: description of the extraperitoneal approach using the da Vinci robotic system.

Authors:  Matthew T Gettman; András Hoznek; Laurent Salomon; Ran Katz; Tomasz Borkowski; Patrick Antiphon; Adrian Lobontiu; Clément-Claude Abbou
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  19 in total

Review 1.  Status of robotic assistance--a less traumatic and more accurate minimally invasive surgery?

Authors:  H G Kenngott; L Fischer; F Nickel; J Rom; J Rassweiler; B P Müller-Stich
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2011-10-29       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 2.  Oncological and functional results of open, robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: does surgical approach and surgical experience matter?

Authors:  T R Herrmann; R Rabenalt; J U Stolzenburg; E N Liatsikos; F Imkamp; H Tezval; A J Gross; U Jonas; M Burchardt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2007-03-13       Impact factor: 4.226

3.  A consensus document on robotic surgery.

Authors:  D M Herron; M Marohn
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-12-28       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Comparison of mid-term carcinologic control obtained after open, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Sarah J Drouin; Christophe Vaessen; Vincent Hupertan; Eva Comperat; Vincent Misraï; Alain Haertig; Marc-Olivier Bitker; Emmanuel Chartier-Kastler; François Richard; Morgan Rouprêt
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 4.226

5.  Impact of surgical technique (open vs laparoscopic vs robotic-assisted) on pathological and biochemical outcomes following radical prostatectomy: an analysis using propensity score matching.

Authors:  Ahmed Magheli; Mark L Gonzalgo; Li-Ming Su; Thomas J Guzzo; George Netto; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Misop Han; Alan W Partin; Christian P Pavlovich
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2010-11-02       Impact factor: 5.588

6.  Robotic assistance improves intracorporeal suturing performance and safety in the operating room while decreasing operator workload.

Authors:  Dimitrios Stefanidis; Fikre Wang; James R Korndorffer; J Bruce Dunne; Daniel J Scott
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-06-18       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Robot-assisted partial nephrectomy: analysis of the first 100 cases from a single institution.

Authors:  Scott Tobis; Sriram Venigalla; Joy K Knopf; Emelian Scosyrev; Erdal N Erturk; Dragan J Golijanin; Jean V Joseph; Hani Rashid; Guan Wu
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-06-10

8.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: initial experience with first 112 cases.

Authors:  Ali Ihsan Tasci; Alper Bitkin; Yusuf Ozlem Ilbey; Volkan Tugcu; Erkan Sonmezay
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2011-09-04

9.  Robot-assisted laparoscopic transperitoneal pelvic lymphadenectomy and metastasectomy for melanoma: initial report of two cases.

Authors:  William Sohn; David S Finley; James Jakowatz; David K Ornstein
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2010-06-11

10.  Laparoscopic and robotic ureteral stenosis repair: a multi-institutional experience with a long-term follow-up.

Authors:  Riccardo Schiavina; Stefano Zaramella; Francesco Chessa; Cristian Vincenzo Pultrone; Marco Borghesi; Andrea Minervini; Andrea Cocci; Andrea Chindemi; Alessandro Antonelli; Claudio Simeone; Vincenzo Pagliarulo; Paolo Parma; Alessanrdo Samuelli; Antonio Celia; Bernardino De Concilio; Bernardo Rocco; Elisa De Lorenzis; Gaetano La Manna; Carlo Terrone; Mario Falsaperla; Donato Dente; Angelo Porreca
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2016-05-21
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.