Comparison of operative and functional outcomes of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy and radical retropubic prostatectomy: Single surgeon experience

被引:35
|
作者
Ghavamian, Reza [1 ]
Knoll, Abraham [1 ]
Boczko, Judd [1 ]
Melman, Arnold [1 ]
机构
[1] Montefiore Med Ctr, Albert Einstein Coll Med, Dept Urol, Bronx, NY 10467 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.urology.2005.12.017
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives. To compare radical retropubic prostatectomy (RRP) and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) outcomes in a contemporary series. Methods. A total of 70 LRP patients operated on between 2001 and 2002 with at least 18 months of follow-up were selected. These patients were compared with a matched cohort of 70 patients who had undergone RRP by the same surgeon from 1999 to 2001. The baseline patient characteristics, perioperative and histologic parameters, recovery time, complications, and 18-month functional data were compared. Results. No significant differences were found in the preoperative characteristics. The mean operative time was 181.8 +/- 18.7 minutes for RRP and 246.4 +/- 46.1 minutes for LRP (P < 0.0001). The mean estimated blood loss was 563.2 mL for RRP and 275.8 mL for LRP (P < 0.0001). The positive margin rate was 20% and 15.7% for the RRP and LRP groups, respectively (P = NS). The mean pain score on postoperative day I was 4.5 in the LRP group and 7.8 in the RRP group on an analog pain score of 0 to 10 (P = 0.02). Full recovery was achieved at 33 +/- 17 days and 45 20 days for the LRP and RRP groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The total perioperative complication rate for LRP and RRP was comparable at 18.5% and 15.7%, respectively. The diurnal continence rate (no pads) for the LRP and RRP groups was 70%, 90%, and 92.8% and 71.4%, 87.6%, and 92% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively (P = NS). The potency rate after bilateral neurovascular preservation with or without sildenafil for the LRP and RRP group was 55%, 72.6%, and 79.5% and 43%, 58%, and 72.4% at 6, 12, and 18 months, respectively (P = NS). Conclusions. LRP is well tolerated and provides short-term oncologic and functional results comparable to those of RRP.
引用
收藏
页码:1241 / 1246
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Assessment of oncological and functional outcomes of retropubic radical prostatectomy: An academic center experience
    Prudhomme, T.
    Roumiguie, M.
    Pericart, S.
    Doumerc, N.
    Lesourd, M.
    Patard, P. M.
    Game, X.
    Soulie, M.
    Thoulouzan, M.
    [J]. PROGRES EN UROLOGIE, 2021, 31 (16): : 1123 - 1132
  • [32] RADICAL RETROPUBIC PROSTATECTOMY - INITIAL EXPERIENCE
    Costache, C.
    Novac, C.
    Ciuta, C.
    Costachescu, Oana
    Costandache, C.
    Radu, V.
    Ristescu, C.
    Andriciuc, R.
    Novac, B.
    [J]. MEDICAL-SURGICAL JOURNAL-REVISTA MEDICO-CHIRURGICALA, 2013, 117 (01): : 148 - 152
  • [33] Comparison between retropubic radical prostatectomy and robotic prostatectomy
    不详
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2004, 18 : A125 - A125
  • [34] SURGEON VARIANCE IN PATIENT-REPORTED AND CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF RETROPUBIC, LAPAROSCOPIC, OR ROBOTIC RADICAL PROSTATECTOMY
    Sanda, Martin
    Chipman, Jonathan
    Wei, John
    Hembroff, Larry
    Hollenbeck, Brent
    Wood, David
    Saigal, Chris
    Litwin, Mark
    Hu, James
    Dahl, Douglas
    Wagner, Andrew
    Klein, Eric
    Pisters, Louis
    Kibel, Adam
    Andriole, Gerald
    Dunn, Rodney
    Regan, Meredith
    [J]. JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2012, 187 (04): : E732 - E732
  • [35] Comparison of oncological results and functional outcomes of radical prostatectomy techniques retropubic, laparoscopic and robot-assisted
    Prilepskaya, E. A.
    Maltsev, E. G.
    Kolontarev, K. B.
    Govorov, A. V.
    Rasner, P. I.
    Vasilyev, A. O.
    Sadchenko, A. V.
    Dyakov, V. V.
    Pushkar, D. U.
    [J]. ONKOUROLOGIYA, 2015, 11 (04): : 54 - 58
  • [36] Outcomes after radical retropubic prostatectomy
    Noh, C
    Kshirsagar, A
    Mohler, JL
    [J]. UROLOGY, 2003, 61 (02) : 412 - 416
  • [37] Predictors of operative time during radical retropubic prostatectomy and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomy
    Simon, Ross M.
    Howard, Lauren E.
    Moreira, Daniel M.
    Terris, Martha K.
    Kane, Christopher J.
    Aronson, William J.
    Amling, Christopher L.
    Cooperberg, Matthew R.
    Freedland, Stephen J.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2017, 24 (08) : 618 - 623
  • [38] Comparison of Robotic-assisted versus Retropubic Radical Prostatectomy Performed by a Single Surgeon
    Ou, Yen-Chuan
    Yang, Chi-Rei
    Wang, John
    Cheng, Chen-Li
    Patel, Vipul R.
    [J]. ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2009, 29 (05) : 1637 - 1642
  • [39] Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?
    Abbas Basiri
    Jean JMCH de la Rosette
    Shahin Tabatabaei
    Henry H. Woo
    M. Pilar Laguna
    Hamidreza Shemshaki
    [J]. World Journal of Urology, 2018, 36 : 609 - 621
  • [40] Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?
    Basiri, Abbas
    de la Rosette, Jean J. M. C. H.
    Tabatabaei, Shahin
    Woo, Henry H.
    Laguna, M. Pilar
    Shemshaki, Hamidreza
    [J]. WORLD JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2018, 36 (04) : 609 - 621