OBJECTIVES: To compare radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) outcomes in a contemporary series. METHODS: A total of 70 LRP patients operated on between 2001 and 2002 with at least 18 months of follow-up were selected. These patients were compared with a matched cohort of 70 patients who had undergone RRP by the same surgeon from 1999 to 2001. The baseline patient characteristics, perioperative and histologic parameters, recovery time, complications, and 18-month functional data were compared. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the preoperative characteristics. The mean operative time was 181.8 +/- 18.7 minutes for RRP and 246.4 +/- 46.1 minutes for LRP (P <0.0001). The mean estimated blood loss was 563.2 mL for RRP and 275.8 mL for LRP (P <0.0001). The positive margin rate was 20% and 15.7% for the RRP and LRP groups, respectively (P = NS). The mean pain score on postoperative day 1 was 4.5 in the LRP group and 7.8 in the RRP group on an analog pain score of 0 to 10 (P = 0.02). Full recovery was achieved at 33 +/- 17 days and 45 +/- 20 days for the LRP and RRP groups, respectively (P <0.001). The total perioperative complication rate for LRP and RRP was comparable at 18.5% and 15.7%, respectively. The diurnal continence rate (no pads) for the LRP and RRP groups was 70%, 90%, and 92.8% and 71.4%, 87.6%, and 92% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively (P = NS). The potency rate after bilateral neurovascular preservation with or without sildenafil for the LRP and RRP group was 55%, 72.6%, and 79.5% and 43%, 58%, and 72.4% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: LRP is well tolerated and provides short-term oncologic and functional results comparable to those of RRP.
OBJECTIVES: To compare radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) outcomes in a contemporary series. METHODS: A total of 70 LRP patients operated on between 2001 and 2002 with at least 18 months of follow-up were selected. These patients were compared with a matched cohort of 70 patients who had undergone RRP by the same surgeon from 1999 to 2001. The baseline patient characteristics, perioperative and histologic parameters, recovery time, complications, and 18-month functional data were compared. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in the preoperative characteristics. The mean operative time was 181.8 +/- 18.7 minutes for RRP and 246.4 +/- 46.1 minutes for LRP (P <0.0001). The mean estimated blood loss was 563.2 mL for RRP and 275.8 mL for LRP (P <0.0001). The positive margin rate was 20% and 15.7% for the RRP and LRP groups, respectively (P = NS). The mean pain score on postoperative day 1 was 4.5 in the LRP group and 7.8 in the RRP group on an analog pain score of 0 to 10 (P = 0.02). Full recovery was achieved at 33 +/- 17 days and 45 +/- 20 days for the LRP and RRP groups, respectively (P <0.001). The total perioperative complication rate for LRP and RRP was comparable at 18.5% and 15.7%, respectively. The diurnal continence rate (no pads) for the LRP and RRP groups was 70%, 90%, and 92.8% and 71.4%, 87.6%, and 92% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively (P = NS). The potency rate after bilateral neurovascular preservation with or without sildenafil for the LRP and RRP group was 55%, 72.6%, and 79.5% and 43%, 58%, and 72.4% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively (P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: LRP is well tolerated and provides short-term oncologic and functional results comparable to those of RRP.
Authors: Abbas Basiri; Jean Jmch de la Rosette; Shahin Tabatabaei; Henry H Woo; M Pilar Laguna; Hamidreza Shemshaki Journal: World J Urol Date: 2018-01-23 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Deok-Hyun Nam; Eu Chang Hwang; Chang Min Im; Sun-Ouck Kim; Seung Il Jung; Dong Deuk Kwon; Kwangsung Park; Soo Bang Ryu Journal: Korean J Urol Date: 2011-01-24
Authors: O Kofler; S Prueckner; E Weninger; R Tomasi; A Karl; S Niedermayer; A Jovanovic; H H Müller; C Stief; B Zwissler; V von Dossow Journal: Prostate Cancer Date: 2019-05-14