Literature DB >> 21427586

Open versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: which is better?

Timothy Wilson1, Robert Torrey.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Over the last decade there has been a changing trend in technique for radical prostatectomy from open surgery to minimally invasive robotic-assisted laparoscopic technology. This review evaluates the validity of this change by reviewing the current literature and comparing open radical retropubic prostatectomy to robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy. RECENT
FINDINGS: Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy shows equivalent and possibly better results when compared with radical retropubic prostatectomy with respect to intraoperative and postoperative parameters including continence, potency and quality of life. Time is still needed to determine long-term oncologic results, but initial findings are promising.
SUMMARY: This review supports the current trend in shifting the standard of care for radical prostatectomy from an open to a robotic-assisted laparoscopic approach.

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21427586     DOI: 10.1097/MOU.0b013e32834493b3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Opin Urol        ISSN: 0963-0643            Impact factor:   2.309


  7 in total

1.  Factors predicting prolonged operative time for individual surgical steps of robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP): A single surgeon's experience.

Authors:  Abdullah M Alenizi; Roger Valdivieso; Emad Rajih; Malek Meskawi; Cristian Toarta; Marc Bienz; Mounsif Azizi; Pierre Alain Hueber; Hugo Lavigueur-Blouin; Vincent Trudeau; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Assaad El-Hakim; Kevin C Zorn
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.862

Review 2.  Does robotic prostatectomy meet its promise in the management of prostate cancer?

Authors:  Kuo-How Huang; Stacey C Carter; Jim C Hu
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.092

3.  A reference set of health utilities for long-term survivors of prostate cancer: population-based data from Ontario, Canada.

Authors:  Murray D Krahn; Karen E Bremner; Shabbir M H Alibhai; Andy Ni; George Tomlinson; Audrey Laporte; Gary Naglie
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-04-06       Impact factor: 4.147

4.  Evaluation of stiffness feedback for hard nodule identification on a phantom silicone model.

Authors:  Min Li; Jelizaveta Konstantinova; Guanghua Xu; Bo He; Vahid Aminzadeh; Jun Xie; Helge Wurdemann; Kaspar Althoefer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-01       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 5.  Is Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy associated with better functional and oncological outcomes? Literature review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Najib Isse Dirie; Gaurab Pokhrel; Wei Guan; Mukhtar Adan Mumin; Jun Yang; Jackson Ferdinand Masau; Henglong Hu; Shaogang Wang
Journal:  Asian J Urol       Date:  2018-02-09

6.  Improvement in early continence after introduction of periurethral suspension stitch in robotic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Erling Aarsæther; Marius Roaldsen; Tore Knutsen; Hiten R Patel; Bård Soltun
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2020-10-14

7.  Comparison of plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) levels after robot-assisted laparoscopic and retropubic radical prostatectomy: an observational study.

Authors:  Arzu Karaveli; Ali Sait Kavakli; Ozlem Cakin; Guzin Aykal; Ali Yildiz; Mutlu Ates
Journal:  Braz J Anesthesiol       Date:  2021-04-02
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.