PURPOSE: To review a single surgeon experience of transitioning to a robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy program (RALP) with prior pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of surgical results from a single surgeon performing LRP transitioning to RALP was performed. Two hundred five patients undergoing RALP by a single, fellowship-trained, urologic oncologist were analyzed and compared with 45 patients undergoing LRP by the same surgeon. Operative, pathologic, and functional outcomes were evaluated. Validated questionnaires, including the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), were utilized for assessing urinary and sexual parameters. RESULTS: Preoperative parameters (age, PSA, Gleason score) were similar in both RALP and LRP groups. Operative time (190 vs. 299 minutes), estimated blood loss (253 vs. 299 ml), and length of stay (1.6 vs. 2.6 days) were reduced in RALP vs. LRP. Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward fewer transfusions with RALP (2.0% vs. 4.4%) as well as a lower positive margin rate in organ-confined (pT2) disease (9.8%, RALP vs. 20%, LRP). Continence at 12 months was 94% following RALP as opposed to 82% after LRP. In preoperatively potent men undergoing bilateral nerve sparing procedures, RALP conferred 81% potency at 12 months as opposed to only 62% following LRP. CONCLUSIONS: The transition from LRP to RALP, in concert with an institutional commitment to a successful robotic surgery program, has yielded superior operative, oncologic, and functional results. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
PURPOSE: To review a single surgeon experience of transitioning to a robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy program (RALP) with prior pure laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of surgical results from a single surgeon performing LRP transitioning to RALP was performed. Two hundred five patients undergoing RALP by a single, fellowship-trained, urologic oncologist were analyzed and compared with 45 patients undergoing LRP by the same surgeon. Operative, pathologic, and functional outcomes were evaluated. Validated questionnaires, including the International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) and International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF), were utilized for assessing urinary and sexual parameters. RESULTS: Preoperative parameters (age, PSA, Gleason score) were similar in both RALP and LRP groups. Operative time (190 vs. 299 minutes), estimated blood loss (253 vs. 299 ml), and length of stay (1.6 vs. 2.6 days) were reduced in RALP vs. LRP. Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward fewer transfusions with RALP (2.0% vs. 4.4%) as well as a lower positive margin rate in organ-confined (pT2) disease (9.8%, RALP vs. 20%, LRP). Continence at 12 months was 94% following RALP as opposed to 82% after LRP. In preoperatively potent men undergoing bilateral nerve sparing procedures, RALP conferred 81% potency at 12 months as opposed to only 62% following LRP. CONCLUSIONS: The transition from LRP to RALP, in concert with an institutional commitment to a successful robotic surgery program, has yielded superior operative, oncologic, and functional results. Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
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: Ryuta Tanimoto; Yomi Fashola; Kymora B Scotland; Anne E Calvaresi; Leonard G Gomella; Edouard J Trabulsi; Costas D Lallas Journal: BMC Urol Date: 2015-04-08 Impact factor: 2.264