Literature DB >> 25216924

Oncologic results, functional outcomes, and complication rates of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: multicenter experience in Turkey including 1,499 patients.

A I Tasci1, I Tufek, E Gumus, A E Canda, V Tugcu, F Atug, U Boylu, Z Akbulut, S Sahin, A Simsek, A R Kural.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) is a rising minimally invasive treatment of localized prostate cancer (PC). We present our multicenter experience of 1,499 consecutive cases with an analysis of complication rates, oncologic, and functional outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From March 2005 through December 2012, details of 1,499 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Transperitoneal approach using a da-Vinci robotic system was used to perform RARP. Perioperative characteristics and postoperative oncologic and functional outcomes are reported.
RESULTS: The mean age was 61.3 years (37-77). Mean PSA level was 8.3 ng/ml. According to D'Amico classification, the percentage of patients with low-, intermediate-, and high-risk disease cases were 65.0, 30.1, and 4.8 %, respectively. Mean operative time was 181.9 min. Mean estimated blood loss was 225.4 cc (30-1,250). Positive surgical margin (PSM) was detected in 212 (14.1 %) patients. PSM rates in pT2, pT3, and pT4 stages were 6.1, 37.1, and 100 %, respectively. The overall complication rate due to modified Clavien classification was 6.1 %. Mean follow-up time was 26.7 months. Continence, potency, and biochemical recurrence rates were 88.7, 58.2, and 2.9 %, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Our analyses including high-volume centers, which is the first largest series in Turkey, show that RARP is a safe procedure, has low PSM rates, high continence, and potency rates for the treatment of localized PC at experienced centers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25216924     DOI: 10.1007/s00345-014-1393-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Urol        ISSN: 0724-4983            Impact factor:   4.226


  38 in total

1.  Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: a comparison of one surgeon's outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas E Ahlering; David Woo; Louis Eichel; David I Lee; Robert Edwards; Douglas W Skarecky
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 2.649

Review 2.  Retropubic, laparoscopic, and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: a systematic review and cumulative analysis of comparative studies.

Authors:  Vincenzo Ficarra; Giacomo Novara; Walter Artibani; Andrea Cestari; Antonio Galfano; Markus Graefen; Giorgio Guazzoni; Bertrand Guillonneau; Mani Menon; Francesco Montorsi; Vipul Patel; Jens Rassweiler; Hendrik Van Poppel
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2009-01-25       Impact factor: 20.096

Review 3.  Comparison of radical prostatectomy techniques: open, laparoscopic and robotic assisted.

Authors:  Rodrigo Frota; Burak Turna; Rodrigo Barros; Inderbir S Gill
Journal:  Int Braz J Urol       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.541

4.  Robotic assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy versus radical retropubic prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: comparison of short-term biochemical recurrence-free survival.

Authors:  Daniel A Barocas; Shady Salem; Yakup Kordan; S Duke Herrell; Sam S Chang; Peter E Clark; Rodney Davis; Roxelyn Baumgartner; Sharon Phillips; Michael S Cookson; Joseph A Smith
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-01-18       Impact factor: 7.450

5.  Perioperative complications of laparoscopic and robotic assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jim C Hu; Rebecca A Nelson; Timothy G Wilson; Mark H Kawachi; S Adam Ramin; Clayton Lau; Laura E Crocitto
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Complications in 2200 consecutive laparoscopic radical prostatectomies: standardised evaluation and analysis of learning curves.

Authors:  Marcel Hruza; Hagen O Weiss; Giovannalberto Pini; Ali S Goezen; Michael Schulze; Dogu Teber; Jens J Rassweiler
Journal:  Eur Urol       Date:  2010-08-20       Impact factor: 20.096

7.  Trifecta outcomes after robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Sergey A Shikanov; Kevin C Zorn; Gregory P Zagaja; Arieh L Shalhav
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2009-07-09       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Radical prostatectomy versus watchful waiting in localized prostate cancer: the Scandinavian prostate cancer group-4 randomized trial.

Authors:  Anna Bill-Axelson; Lars Holmberg; Frej Filén; Mirja Ruutu; Hans Garmo; Christer Busch; Stig Nordling; Michael Häggman; Swen-Olof Andersson; Stefan Bratell; Anders Spångberg; Juni Palmgren; Hans-Olov Adami; Jan-Erik Johansson
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2008-08-11       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy: advances since 2005.

Authors:  Li-Ming Su
Journal:  Curr Opin Urol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 2.309

Review 10.  Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy: a review of current outcomes.

Authors:  Rafael F Coelho; Sanket Chauhan; Kenneth J Palmer; Bernardo Rocco; Manoj B Patel; Vipul R Patel
Journal:  BJU Int       Date:  2009-10-05       Impact factor: 5.588

View more
  5 in total

1.  Intraoperative frozen section monitoring during nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy: evaluation of partial secondary resection of neurovascular bundles and its effect on oncologic and functional outcome.

Authors:  Georgios Hatzichristodoulou; Stefan Wagenpfeil; Gregor Weirich; Michael Autenrieth; Tobias Maurer; Mark Thalgott; Thomas Horn; Matthias Heck; Kathleen Herkommer; Jürgen E Gschwend; Hubert Kübler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-06-23       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Robotic radical prostatectomy in 93 cases: Outcomes of the first ERUS robotic urology curriculum trained surgeon in Turkey.

Authors:  Fevzi Bedir; Murat Keske; Şaban Oğuz Demirdöğen; Hüseyin Kocatürk; Erdem Koç; Abdullah Erdem Canda; Ali Fuat Atmaca
Journal:  Turk J Urol       Date:  2019-02-04

3.  Extended versus limited pelvic lymph node dissection during bilateral nerve-sparing radical prostatectomy and its effect on continence and erectile function recovery: long-term results and trifecta rates of a comparative analysis.

Authors:  Georgios Hatzichristodoulou; Stefan Wagenpfeil; Gudrun Wagenpfeil; Tobias Maurer; Thomas Horn; Kathleen Herkommer; Marie Hegemann; Jürgen E Gschwend; Hubert Kübler
Journal:  World J Urol       Date:  2015-09-29       Impact factor: 4.226

4.  Robotic surgery in urological oncology: patient care or market share?

Authors:  Deborah R Kaye; Jeffrey K Mullins; H Ballentine Carter; Trinity J Bivalacqua
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2014-12-23       Impact factor: 14.432

5.  A novel "three-port" trocar placement technique for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Ben Xu; Yi-Ji Peng; Guo-Zhong Ma; Qian Zhang
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-10-27       Impact factor: 2.754

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.