Literature DB >> 24730750

Laparoscopic versus robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: an Australian single-surgeon series.

Alexander Papachristos1, Marnique Basto, Luc Te Marvelde, Daniel Moon.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In Australia, robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has steadily replaced open and laparoscopic surgery in the management of localized prostate cancer. Given the increased cost of this technology, we aimed to compare the perioperative, pathological, oncological and functional outcomes as well as short-term complications of laparoscopic and RARP.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data on 200 consecutive patients during the transition of a single surgeon (DM) from pure laparoscopic (n = 100) to RARP (n = 100) between September 2007 and March 2011.
RESULTS: Median operative time and estimated blood loss were the same for both surgical approaches, 195 min (P = 0.29) and 300 mL (P = 0.88) respectively. Median length of hospital stay was shorter for RARP (P = 0.003). Complication rates were not statistically different between groups. There was no significant difference in positive surgical margin rates in pT2 (P = 0.36) or pT3 disease (0.99) or biochemical recurrence rate between groups (P = 0.14). The 12 months continence rate was improved with RARP compared with laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (93% versus 82%; P = 0.025). The potency rate was 56% and 74% at 12 months after laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and RARP respectively (P = 0.12) for a bilateral nerve sparing procedure.
CONCLUSION: We conclude from our single-surgeon comparative series that the robotic approach results in a significantly shorter length of hospital stay and improved 12 months continence rates and demonstrated a trend towards better potency rates. Complications, positive surgical margin rates and the requirement for adjuvant therapy are all improved with the robotic approach but did not show statistically significant differences.
© 2014 Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Entities:  

Keywords:  laparoscopic radical prostatectomy; prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy; robotic surgery; robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24730750     DOI: 10.1111/ans.12602

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  ANZ J Surg        ISSN: 1445-1433            Impact factor:   1.872


  15 in total

Review 1.  Surgical Management of Organ-Confined Prostate Cancer with Review of Literature and Evolving Evidence.

Authors:  Ahmed Saeed Goolam; Alfredo Harb-De la Rosa; Murugesan Manoharan
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2017-01-13

Review 2.  Comparison of perioperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes between standard laparoscopic and robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Xing Huang; Lei Wang; Xinmin Zheng; Xinghuan Wang
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-07-21       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Prostatectomies for localized prostate cancer: a mixed comparison network and cumulative meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kannan Sridharan; Gowri Sivaramakrishnan
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2018-02-23

4.  Comparative Effectiveness of Cancer Control and Survival after Robot-Assisted versus Open Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Padraic O'Malley; Bilal Chughtai; Abby Isaacs; Jialin Mao; Jason D Wright; Dawn Hershman; Art Sedrakyan
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 7.450

Review 5.  Influence of steep Trendelenburg position on postoperative complications: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Satoshi Katayama; Keiichiro Mori; Benjamin Pradere; Takafumi Yanagisawa; Hadi Mostafaei; Fahad Quhal; Reza Sari Motlagh; Ekaterina Laukhtina; Nico C Grossmann; Pawel Rajwa; Abdulmajeed Aydh; Frederik König; Pierre I Karakiewicz; Motoo Araki; Yasutomo Nasu; Shahrokh F Shariat
Journal:  J Robot Surg       Date:  2021-12-31

6.  Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy versus standard laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: an evidence-based analysis of comparative outcomes.

Authors:  Umberto Carbonara; Maya Srinath; Fabio Crocerossa; Matteo Ferro; Francesco Cantiello; Giuseppe Lucarelli; Francesco Porpiglia; Michele Battaglia; Pasquale Ditonno; Riccardo Autorino
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2021-04-11       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 7.  Transperitoneal versus extraperitoneal approach in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Kun Wang; Qianfeng Zhuang; Renfang Xu; Hao Lu; Guanglai Song; Jianping Wang; Zinong Tian; Qingyan Mao; Pengfeng Gong
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 1.889

8.  Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy learning curve for experienced laparoscopic surgeons: does it really exist?

Authors:  Marcos Tobias-Machado; Anuar Ibrahim Mitre; Mauricio Rubinstein; Eduardo Fernandes da Costa; Alexandre Kyoshi Hidaka
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2016 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.541

Review 9.  Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Is More Beneficial for Prostate Cancer Patients: A System Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yuefeng Du; Qingzhi Long; Bin Guan; Lijun Mu; Juanhua Tian; Yumei Jiang; Xiaojing Bai; Dapeng Wu
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2018-01-14

10.  A Safe teaching protocol of LRP (laparoscopic radical prostatectomy).

Authors:  Marcos Tobias-Machado; Cristiano Linck Pazeto; Oseas Castro Neves-Neto; Igor Nunes-Silva; Hamilton de Campos Zampolli
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2018 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.541

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.