PURPOSE: To present a critical overview of the current literature on the role of laparoscopy for the surgical treatment of patients with large prostatic adenomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A MedLine search for peer-reviewed studies on laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP) was performed. The clinical studies that reported most of the following information were included: number of patients, prostate volume, operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, and the duration of catheterization, as well as functional outcomes and complications. Articles reporting a mean total prostate volume of <80 mL or a mean prostatic adenoma of <60 mL were excluded. The review was performed according to the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: Fourteen articles on LSP were included in this systematic review with a total of 626 patients treated. Both transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approaches, as well as transvesical and transcapsular routes, have been described. Eleven articles were case-series and three were comparative retrospective nonrandomized studies. When compared with open simple prostatectomy (OP), LSP is associated with a less blood loss and a reduced irrigation requirement, a shorter postoperative catheterization period, and a shorter hospital stay, at the expense of an extended operative time. The limited number of patients treated, the selection biases due to the retrospective nature of several published articles on LSP, and the short follow-up periods are evident limits of the literature. I-square test demonstrated a high heterogeneity (93%) and consequently a high variability in the intervention effects in terms of maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax). CONCLUSIONS: Even if LSP seems feasible and safe, there is still limited evidence regarding its long-term outcomes compared with OP.
PURPOSE: To present a critical overview of the current literature on the role of laparoscopy for the surgical treatment of patients with large prostatic adenomas. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A MedLine search for peer-reviewed studies on laparoscopic simple prostatectomy (LSP) was performed. The clinical studies that reported most of the following information were included: number of patients, prostate volume, operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, and the duration of catheterization, as well as functional outcomes and complications. Articles reporting a mean total prostate volume of <80 mL or a mean prostatic adenoma of <60 mL were excluded. The review was performed according to the PRISMA statement. RESULTS: Fourteen articles on LSP were included in this systematic review with a total of 626 patients treated. Both transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approaches, as well as transvesical and transcapsular routes, have been described. Eleven articles were case-series and three were comparative retrospective nonrandomized studies. When compared with open simple prostatectomy (OP), LSP is associated with a less blood loss and a reduced irrigation requirement, a shorter postoperative catheterization period, and a shorter hospital stay, at the expense of an extended operative time. The limited number of patients treated, the selection biases due to the retrospective nature of several published articles on LSP, and the short follow-up periods are evident limits of the literature. I-square test demonstrated a high heterogeneity (93%) and consequently a high variability in the intervention effects in terms of maximum urinary flow rate (Qmax). CONCLUSIONS: Even if LSP seems feasible and safe, there is still limited evidence regarding its long-term outcomes compared with OP.
Authors: L Lusuardi; S Hruby; G Janetschek; M Mitterberger; M Sieberer; D Colleselli; T Kunit; W Hitzl; B Kloss Journal: World J Urol Date: 2015-01-03 Impact factor: 4.226