Literature DB >> 18342158

[Retropubic, laparoscopic and robot-assisted total prostatectomies: comparison of postoperative course and histological and functional results based on a series of 86 prostatectomies].

X Durand1, C Vaessen, M-O Bitker, F Richard.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Compare three surgical approach procedures of total prostatectomy (retropubic, transperitoneal laparoscopic and robot-assisted laparoscopic), about technical, oncological and functional results.
METHODS: Eighty-six patients had a total prostatectomy for localized cancer, in a unique center, performed by two expert surgeons, on a 16-months-period. Twenty nine had a retropubic, 23 a transperitoneal laparoscopic and 34 a robot-assisted (Da Vinci) surgical approach. Retrospectively, operative time, blood loss, per- and postoperative complications, duration of catheterization, length of hospital stay, in each group had been compared. The positive margin rates, the PSA levels at one and six months postoperative had been compared. The continence has also been evaluated at six months.
RESULTS: The three groups are comparable even if the median age is significatively lower in the retropubic group (p=0.018). Duration of catheter (p<2.2 x 10(-16)), blood loss (p<3.12 x 10(-5)) and operative times support significatively the laparscopic approaches, clearer the conventional than the robot-assisted one. No significative difference has been shown about positive margin rates, even if it's higher in the robot-assisted group (p=0.37). Finally, the continence rate is quite higher in the laparoscopic groups without statistic significativity (76 % retropubic versus 96.8 % laparoscopic and 85.3 % robot-assisted).
CONCLUSIONS: The conventional laparoscopic and robot-assisted approaches seem to present technical advantages. Nevertheless, pathologic results are shader: the positive margin rate in the robot-assisted group is higher, in particular regarding to pT2. These results are concordant with the available datas of the literature.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18342158     DOI: 10.1016/j.purol.2007.10.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prog Urol        ISSN: 1166-7087            Impact factor:   0.915


  3 in total

1.  Retropubic, Laparoscopic, and Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: A Comparative Analysis of the Surgical Outcomes in a Single Regional Center.

Authors:  Lorenzo Giuseppe Luciani; Daniele Mattevi; William Mantovani; Tommaso Cai; Stefano Chiodini; Valentino Vattovani; Marco Puglisi; Daniele Tiscione; Umberto Anceschi; Gianni Malossini
Journal:  Curr Urol       Date:  2017-11-30

Review 2.  Comparison of Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy and Open Radical Prostatectomy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Hyun Ju Seo; Na Rae Lee; Soo Kyung Son; Dae Keun Kim; Koon Ho Rha; Seon Heui Lee
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.759

Review 3.  Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy has lower biochemical recurrence than laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Seon Heui Lee; Hyun Ju Seo; Na Rae Lee; Soo Kyung Son; Dae Keun Kim; Koon Ho Rha
Journal:  Investig Clin Urol       Date:  2017-04-28
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.