Literature DB >> 30328088

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

S Mohammad Jafri1,2, Laura N Nguyen3, Larry T Sirls1,2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Robotic-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy (RALP) has largely replaced open radical prostatectomy in many centers. Radical perineal prostatectomy (RPP) is another less invasive approach that has not been widely adopted. RPP offers excellent exposure of the urinary sphincter and bladder neck that may provide good urinary function outcomes. We evaluate urinary function after RALP and RPP.
METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospective radical prostatectomy database was performed. Urinary modules from the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-Urinary Function (EPIC-UF) questionnaire were used to determine urinary symptoms at baseline and at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after surgery.
RESULTS: 753 men underwent RALP (n = 623) or RPP (n = 130). Of these, 558 had complete data and were included in our study (RALP: n = 458, RPP: n = 100). A higher number of patients undergoing RALP than RPP had pelvic lymph node dissection (20.2% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001) and cavernosal neurovascular bundle sparing (79.2% vs. 68.4%, p < 0.0001). 558 patients had complete EPIC-UF data. Overall urinary recovery was greater for RALP than RPP at 6 months (p = 0.028). Urinary incontinence and function were also more improved after RALP compared to RPP at 6 months (p = 0.021, p = 0.006). However, no differences in overall, urinary incontinence, or urinary function scores were seen at 12, 18, or 24 months. There was no difference between groups in urinary bother or irritative/obstructive symptoms at any time point.
CONCLUSIONS: RALP had more rapid recovery of urinary function at 6 months vs. RPP; at 12-24 months, however, RALP and RPP had similar urinary function recovery in all urinary subdomains.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Patient outcome assessment; Prostatectomy; Surveys and questionnaires; Urinary incontinence

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30328088     DOI: 10.1007/s11255-018-2013-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol        ISSN: 0301-1623            Impact factor:   2.370


  11 in total

1.  Urinary continence and quality of life in the first year after radical perineal prostatectomy.

Authors:  Matthew D Young; Alon Z Weizer; Ari D Silverstein; Alfonso Crisci; David M Albala; Johannes Vieweg; David F Paulson; Philipp Dahm
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 7.450

2.  Comparative effectiveness of perineal versus retropubic and minimally invasive radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Sandip M Prasad; Xiangmei Gu; Rebecca Lavelle; Stuart R Lipsitz; Jim C Hu
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2010-11-12       Impact factor: 7.450

3.  Are we underestimating the rates of incontinence after prostate cancer treatment? Results from NHANES.

Authors:  Michael Daugherty; Raju Chelluri; Gennady Bratslavsky; Timothy Byler
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2017-07-14       Impact factor: 2.370

4.  Radical perineal prostatectomy: An outdated procedure?

Authors:  Evi Comploj; Salvatore Palermo; Emanuela Trenti; Thomas Martini; Michele Lodde; Christine Mian; Guido Mazzoleni; Armin Pycha
Journal:  Int J Surg       Date:  2011-04-02       Impact factor: 6.071

5.  Potency-sparing radical perineal prostatectomy: anatomy, surgical technique and initial results.

Authors:  V E Weldon; F R Tavel
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  1988-09       Impact factor: 7.450

6.  Radical perineal prostatectomy: a more optimal treatment approach than laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in obese patients?

Authors:  Albert C Leung; Arnold Melman
Journal:  Rev Urol       Date:  2005

7.  Minimally important difference for the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite Short Form.

Authors:  Ted A Skolarus; Rodney L Dunn; Martin G Sanda; Peter Chang; Thomas K Greenfield; Mark S Litwin; John T Wei
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 2.649

8.  Development and validation of the expanded prostate cancer index composite (EPIC) for comprehensive assessment of health-related quality of life in men with prostate cancer.

Authors:  J T Wei; R L Dunn; M S Litwin; H M Sandler; M G Sanda
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2000-12-20       Impact factor: 2.649

9.  The Risks and Benefits of Cavernous Neurovascular Bundle Sparing during Radical Prostatectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Laura N Nguyen; Linden Head; Kelsey Witiuk; Nahid Punjani; Ranjeeta Mallick; Sonya Cnossen; Dean A Fergusson; Ilias Cagiannos; Luke T Lavallée; Christopher Morash; Rodney H Breau
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 7.450

10.  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
View more
  5 in total

1.  A new method in robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: personalised neuroprotective surgery with neuromonitoring system-randomised controlled study.

Authors:  İbrahim Karabulut; Erkan Cem Çelik; Fatih Kürsat Yılmazel; Fatih Özkaya; Fevzi Bedir; Mustafa Ceylan; Onur Ceylan; Ali Haydar Yılmaz; Şenol Adanur
Journal:  Int Urol Nephrol       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 2.370

Review 2.  Impact of Pelvic Anatomical Changes Caused by Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Yoshifumi Kadono; Takahiro Nohara; Shohei Kawaguchi; Hiroaki Iwamoto; Hiroshi Yaegashi; Kazuyoshi Shigehara; Kouji Izumi; Atsushi Mizokami
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2022-06-21       Impact factor: 6.575

3.  Influence of a continuous nursing model based on network cloud platforms for urinary control, urination function and quality of life of patients after radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Miaomiao Song
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 4.060

4.  Health Related Quality of Life in Japanese Patients with Localized Prostate Cancer: Comparative Retrospective Study of Robot-Assisted Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy Versus Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Yoko Miyoshi; Shuichi Morizane; Masashi Honda; Katsuya Hikita; Hideto Iwamoto; Tetsuya Yumioka; Yusuke Kimura; Shin-Ichi Yoshioka; Atsushi Takenaka
Journal:  Yonago Acta Med       Date:  2020-01-30       Impact factor: 1.641

5.  Investigating the mechanism underlying urinary continence using dynamic MRI after Retzius-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy.

Authors:  Yoshifumi Kadono; Takahiro Nohara; Shohei Kawaguchi; Suguru Kadomoto; Hiroaki Iwamoto; Masashi Iijima; Kazuyoshi Shigehara; Kouji Izumi; Kotaro Yoshida; Toshifumi Gabata; Atsushi Mizokami
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 4.379

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.