OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes of robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RLRP) in overweight and obese patients, defined as those with a body mass index (BMI) of 25 to 30 kg/m2 and greater than 30 kg/m2, respectively. METHODS: This was a nonrandomized study evaluating all of our RLRP patients. Patients were divided into three groups: BMI of 25 kg/m2 or less (group 1), BMI greater than 25 kg/m2 and less than 30 kg/m2 (group 2), and BMI of 30 kg/m2 or more (group 3). Patients were evaluated prospectively with the validated Rand 36-Item Health Survey (version 2) and with the University of California, Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index questionnaire. RESULTS: Between February 2003 and November 2004, 150 RLRPs were performed at our center. Average follow-up was 8 months. Groups 1, 2, and 3 had 39, 65, and 46 patients, respectively. Average BMIs for all three groups were statistically different (P < 0.01). When compared with group 1, open conversion rates, hospital stay, positive margin, and complication rates were not statistically different for groups 2 or 3. Operative time (P < 0.004) and estimated blood loss (P < 0.03), however, were statistically greater for group 3 compared with group 1. Transfusion rate was highest in group 2 (P = 0.04 compared with group 1). Prostate weights were also statistically greater in groups 2 (P = 0.003) and 3 (P = 0.02) compared with group 1. Overall, BMI did not increase perioperative and postoperative morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is safe in overweight and obese patients and might be the surgical management of choice in this subset of patients. Further long-term follow-up with more patients is required to verify this initial observation.
OBJECTIVES: To assess outcomes of robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RLRP) in overweight and obesepatients, defined as those with a body mass index (BMI) of 25 to 30 kg/m2 and greater than 30 kg/m2, respectively. METHODS: This was a nonrandomized study evaluating all of our RLRP patients. Patients were divided into three groups: BMI of 25 kg/m2 or less (group 1), BMI greater than 25 kg/m2 and less than 30 kg/m2 (group 2), and BMI of 30 kg/m2 or more (group 3). Patients were evaluated prospectively with the validated Rand 36-Item Health Survey (version 2) and with the University of California, Los Angeles Prostate Cancer Index questionnaire. RESULTS: Between February 2003 and November 2004, 150 RLRPs were performed at our center. Average follow-up was 8 months. Groups 1, 2, and 3 had 39, 65, and 46 patients, respectively. Average BMIs for all three groups were statistically different (P < 0.01). When compared with group 1, open conversion rates, hospital stay, positive margin, and complication rates were not statistically different for groups 2 or 3. Operative time (P < 0.004) and estimated blood loss (P < 0.03), however, were statistically greater for group 3 compared with group 1. Transfusion rate was highest in group 2 (P = 0.04 compared with group 1). Prostate weights were also statistically greater in groups 2 (P = 0.003) and 3 (P = 0.02) compared with group 1. Overall, BMI did not increase perioperative and postoperative morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic laparoscopic radical prostatectomy is safe in overweight and obesepatients and might be the surgical management of choice in this subset of patients. Further long-term follow-up with more patients is required to verify this initial observation.
Authors: Jonas Busch; Mark L Gonzalgo; Natalia Leva; Michelle Ferrari; Hannes Cash; Carsten Kempkensteffen; Stefan Hinz; Kurt Miller; Ahmed Magheli Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-05-23 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Venu Chalasani; Carlos H Martinez; Darwin Lim; Reem Al Bareeq; Geoffrey R Wignall; Larry Stitt; Stephen E Pautler Journal: Can Urol Assoc J Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 1.862
Authors: B Beyer; K Kühne; K Böhm; J Schiffmann; H Heinzer; U Michl; H Huland; M Graefen; A Haese; T Steuber Journal: Urologe A Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 0.639