Literature DB >> 21443972

Radical perineal prostatectomy: An outdated procedure?

Evi Comploj1, Salvatore Palermo, Emanuela Trenti, Thomas Martini, Michele Lodde, Christine Mian, Guido Mazzoleni, Armin Pycha.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) is an alternative to the retropubic, laparoscopic or robotic prostatectomy approaches. This study reports the experience with RPP of a single surgeon at a single institution; the technical aspects, oncological outcome, and complications, such as urinary incontinence and erectile dysfunction, were investigated.
METHODS: A total of 212 consecutive patients with a mean age of 63 (range 45-74) years and clinically localised prostate cancer were monitored. Between January 2001 and December 2010, all patients underwent RPP that was performed by a single experienced surgeon at one institution. All data were introduced into a database focussing on the intra-operative and post-operative complications, continence rate, potency and oncological outcome.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 48 (6-117) months. Intra-operative complications, both early and late, occurred in 19% of the patients. The average length of in-hospital stay was 9 (3-45) days, and the mean period of time spent with a urethral catheter in place was 9 (4-45) days. The continence rate was 81%, and the potency rate, without any pharmacological aid, was 27%. The overall PSA-free survival rate was 86%. There was one cancer-specific death.
CONCLUSION: On the basis of our prospective data, we conclude that RPP provides satisfactory oncological results with an acceptable outcome in terms of quality of life. RPP can be considered to be mini-invasive and achieves results that are equivalent to those of the alternative surgical approaches.
Copyright © 2011 Surgical Associates Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21443972     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2011.03.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Surg        ISSN: 1743-9159            Impact factor:   6.071


  5 in total

1.  Recovery of urinary function after robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus radical perineal prostatectomy for early-stage prostate cancer.

Authors:  S Mohammad Jafri; Laura N Nguyen; Larry T Sirls
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 2.370

2.  Experience with radical perineal prostatectomy in the treatment of localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Evi Comploj; Armin Pycha
Journal:  Ther Adv Urol       Date:  2012-06

3.  The effects of retropubic and perineal radical prostatectomy techniques on postoperative urinary continence after surgery: Results of 196 patients.

Authors:  Alper Kafkaslı; Mustafa Yücel Boz; Muhsin Balaban; Rahim Horuz; Ahmet Selimoğlu; Selami Albayrak; Önder Cangüven
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2013-09

4.  Radical perineal prostatectomy - the contemporary resurgence of a genuinely minimally invasive procedure: Procedure outline. Comparison of the advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes of different surgical techniques of treating organ-confined prostate cancer (PCa). A literature review with special focus on perineal prostatectomy.

Authors:  Stanisław Wroński
Journal:  Cent European J Urol       Date:  2012-09-04

5.  Is Radical Perineal Prostatectomy a Viable Therapeutic Option for Intermediate- and High-risk Prostate Cancer?

Authors:  Hye Won Lee; Hwang Gyun Jeon; Byong Chang Jeong; Seong Il Seo; Seong Soo Jeon; Hyun Moo Lee; Han Yong Choi
Journal:  J Korean Med Sci       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 2.153

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.