Volkan Tuğcu1, Oktay Akça2, Abdulmuttalip Şimşek1, İsmail Yiğitbaşı1, Selçuk Şahin1, Ali İhsan Taşçı1. 1. Department of Urology, University of Health Sciences, İstanbul Bakırköy Dr. Sadi Konuk Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey. 2. Department of Urology, University of Health Sciences, Kartal Dr. Lütfi Kırdar Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive techniques are increasingly evolving and preferred to reduce surgical induced morbidity and mortality and minimize the challenges of surgical techniques. Especially radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) includes some challenges like working in a deep and narrow space and challenging ergonomics for the surgeons. Because of these issues open RPP is still performed in experienced centers. In order to reduce these difficulties, robot- assisted radical perineal prostatectomy (r-RPP) is developed. In this study, we report our first clinical results for r-RPP. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between November 2016 and February 2017, 15 patients underwent r-RPP in our center. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging was performed for all patients to exclude locally advanced disease. The patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and locally advanced prostate cancer were not chosen for r-RPP method. The patient was positioned in the exaggerated lithotomy with 15 degrees of Trendelenburg position. After incision and dissection of subcutaneous tissue, dissection was advanced to the margin of posterior recto-urethral muscle fibers. Then a GelPOINT® device was placed and robotic system was docked. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 60.2±7.8 years. The mean body mass index of the patients was 28.8±1.9 kg/m2. Four patients had previous major abdominal surgeries. Preoperative mean prostate specific antigen value was 7.3±2.4 ng/mL. The mean prostate volume was 40.8±12.4 cc. Mean perineal dissection time was 60±10.1 minutes. Mean console time and total operation time was 95±11.3 and 167±37.4 minutes, respectively. The mean time of postoperative catheterization was 8.3±1.7 days. Early continence rate was 40% after urethral catheter removal and at 3rd month of the surgery mean continence rate was 94% for all patients. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that r-RPP is a feasible and efficient method. But still this method needs for further studies in this area.
OBJECTIVE: Minimally invasive techniques are increasingly evolving and preferred to reduce surgical induced morbidity and mortality and minimize the challenges of surgical techniques. Especially radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) includes some challenges like working in a deep and narrow space and challenging ergonomics for the surgeons. Because of these issues open RPP is still performed in experienced centers. In order to reduce these difficulties, robot- assisted radical perineal prostatectomy (r-RPP) is developed. In this study, we report our first clinical results for r-RPP. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between November 2016 and February 2017, 15 patients underwent r-RPP in our center. Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging was performed for all patients to exclude locally advanced disease. The patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and locally advanced prostate cancer were not chosen for r-RPP method. The patient was positioned in the exaggerated lithotomy with 15 degrees of Trendelenburg position. After incision and dissection of subcutaneous tissue, dissection was advanced to the margin of posterior recto-urethral muscle fibers. Then a GelPOINT® device was placed and robotic system was docked. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 60.2±7.8 years. The mean body mass index of the patients was 28.8±1.9 kg/m2. Four patients had previous major abdominal surgeries. Preoperative mean prostate specific antigen value was 7.3±2.4 ng/mL. The mean prostate volume was 40.8±12.4 cc. Mean perineal dissection time was 60±10.1 minutes. Mean console time and total operation time was 95±11.3 and 167±37.4 minutes, respectively. The mean time of postoperative catheterization was 8.3±1.7 days. Early continence rate was 40% after urethral catheter removal and at 3rd month of the surgery mean continence rate was 94% for all patients. CONCLUSION: We demonstrate that r-RPP is a feasible and efficient method. But still this method needs for further studies in this area.
Entities:
Keywords:
Perineal prostatectomy; radical prostatectomy; robotic surgery
Authors: Ashutosh Tewari; Prasanna Sooriakumaran; Daniel A Bloch; Usha Seshadri-Kreaden; April E Hebert; Peter Wiklund Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-02-24 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Gelbert Luiz Chamon do Carmo Amorim; Geraldo Magela Gomes da Cruz; Denny Fabrício Magalhães Veloso; José David Kartabil; José Carlos Vieira; Paulo Roberto Alves Journal: Einstein (Sao Paulo) Date: 2010-06
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
Authors: Nicolas Koutlidis; Eric Mourey; Jacqueline Champigneulle; Philippe Mangin; Luc Cormier Journal: Int J Urol Date: 2012-07-31 Impact factor: 3.369