Yunfei Wei1, Jingyuan Tang1, Lin Yuan1, Jian Su1, Yang Zhang1, Zhonglei Deng1, Chen Zhu1, Luming Shen1, Ninghong Wang1, Guojiang Xu1, Yong Yang2, Qingyi Zhu3. 1. Department of Urology, Jiangsu Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, No.155 Han Zhong Road, Nanjing, 210029, China. 2. Department of Pharmaceutical Analysis, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, China. 3. Department of Urology, Jiangsu Province Hospital of Chinese Medicine, Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine, No.155 Han Zhong Road, Nanjing, 210029, China. dr_zhuqingyi@foxmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe our initial experience with laparoendoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and a stepwise transition towards transurethral assisted laparoendoscopic single-site RP (TU-LESS RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2016, 195 patients underwent RP, of which 89 patients were performed by LRP (Group A), 106 by TU-LESS RP (Group B). The peri-operative data were collected and analyzed. All data referring to patient demographics, surgery, pathology, and peri-operative outcomes were recorded. The cosmetic result was investigated by the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ). Analysis of variance or Chi squared test were adopted to analyze the data. RESULTS: 195 procedures were completed successfully. The operation time (109.6 ± 31.9 vs. 151.5 ± 87.3, P = 0.025) and anastomosis time (10.1 ± 4.8 vs. 21.8 ± 9.9, P < 0.001) of Group B was significantly reduced compared with Group A. Estimated blood loss in Group B was significantly lower than that in Group A (95.9 ± 11.1 vs. 180.2 ± 99.7, P = 0.006). About perioperative complications, Group B was also less compared with Group A (1.9% vs. 7.9%, P = 0.047). As to the usage of postoperative analgesics, Group B apparently used less than that in Group A (6.6% vs. 62.9%, P < 0.001), which is consistent with the visual analogue scale (VAS) of the two groups (1.7 ± 1.3 vs. 7.8 ± 1.1, P < 0.001). Patients in Group B were significantly more satisfied with incision healing than in group A (74.9 ± 9.3 vs. 49.7 ± 5.8, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference both in BCR rate and time between Group B and Group A. In urination control, more patients in Group B did not have urinary incontinence 3 month after RP compared with Group A (81.1% vs. 67.4%, P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: LESS RP is proved to be feasible for the proper patients, but it is difficult to popularized due to inconvenient operation. While by means of TU-LESS, operating difficulty can be significantly decreased. TU-LESS RP will be wildly accepted by surgeons and patients because of cosmetic satisfaction and quicker recovery.
PURPOSE: To describe our initial experience with laparoendoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) and a stepwise transition towards transurethral assisted laparoendoscopic single-site RP (TU-LESS RP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From Jan. 2007 to Dec. 2016, 195 patients underwent RP, of which 89 patients were performed by LRP (Group A), 106 by TU-LESS RP (Group B). The peri-operative data were collected and analyzed. All data referring to patient demographics, surgery, pathology, and peri-operative outcomes were recorded. The cosmetic result was investigated by the Patient Scar Assessment Questionnaire (PSAQ). Analysis of variance or Chi squared test were adopted to analyze the data. RESULTS: 195 procedures were completed successfully. The operation time (109.6 ± 31.9 vs. 151.5 ± 87.3, P = 0.025) and anastomosis time (10.1 ± 4.8 vs. 21.8 ± 9.9, P < 0.001) of Group B was significantly reduced compared with Group A. Estimated blood loss in Group B was significantly lower than that in Group A (95.9 ± 11.1 vs. 180.2 ± 99.7, P = 0.006). About perioperative complications, Group B was also less compared with Group A (1.9% vs. 7.9%, P = 0.047). As to the usage of postoperative analgesics, Group B apparently used less than that in Group A (6.6% vs. 62.9%, P < 0.001), which is consistent with the visual analogue scale (VAS) of the two groups (1.7 ± 1.3 vs. 7.8 ± 1.1, P < 0.001). Patients in Group B were significantly more satisfied with incision healing than in group A (74.9 ± 9.3 vs. 49.7 ± 5.8, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference both in BCR rate and time between Group B and Group A. In urination control, more patients in Group B did not have urinary incontinence 3 month after RP compared with Group A (81.1% vs. 67.4%, P = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: LESS RP is proved to be feasible for the proper patients, but it is difficult to popularized due to inconvenient operation. While by means of TU-LESS, operating difficulty can be significantly decreased. TU-LESS RP will be wildly accepted by surgeons and patients because of cosmetic satisfaction and quicker recovery.
Authors: Riccardo Autorino; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Mihir M Desai; Matthew Gettman; Inderbir S Gill; Louis R Kavoussi; Estevão Lima; Francesco Montorsi; Lee Richstone; Jens U Stolzenburg; Jihad H Kaouk Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2010-08-27 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: A N Georgiou; J Rassweiler; T R Herrmann; J U Stolzenburg; E N Liatsikos; Eta Mu Do; P Kallidonis; A de la Teille; R van Velthoven; M Burchardt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2012-07-13 Impact factor: 4.226
Authors: Oscar Darío Martín; Raed A Azhar; Rafael Clavijo; Camilo Gidelman; Luis Medina; Nelson Ramirez Troche; Leonardo Brunacci; René Sotelo Journal: J Robot Surg Date: 2016-04-12
Authors: Mihir M Desai; Monish Aron; David Canes; Khaled Fareed; Oswaldo Carmona; Georges-Pascal Haber; Sebastien Crouzet; Juan Carlos Astigueta; Roy Lopez; Robert de Andrade; Robert J Stein; James Ulchaker; Rene Sotelo; Inderbir S Gill Journal: Urology Date: 2008-10-04 Impact factor: 2.649