A comparison of radical perineal, radical retropubic, and robot-assisted laparoscopic prostatectomies in a single surgeon series.
作者： Moben Mirza , Kevin Art , Logan Wineland , Ossama Tawfik , J. Brantley Thrasher
DOI: 10.1155/2011/878323
关键词:
摘要: Objective. We sought to compare positive surgical margin rates (PSM), estimated blood loss (EBL), and quality of life outcomes (QOL) among perineal (RPP), retropubic (RRP), robot-assisted laparoscopic (RALP) prostatectomies. Methods. Records from 463 consecutive men undergoing RPP (92), RRP (180), or RALP (191) for clinically localized prostate cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Age, percent tumor volume, Gleason score, stage, EBL, PSM, QOL using the expanded index composite (EPIC) compared. Results. PSM similar when adjusted grade, volume. EBL was significantly less in (189 ml) group compared both (475 (999 groups. When corrected nerve sparing, there no differences erectile function sexual amongst three Urinary summary pad usage scores showed significant differences. Conclusion. RPP, RRP, offer outcomes. demonstrate RRP.
hindawi.com参考文章(20)
Eric A. Klein, Contemporary Technique of Radical Prostatectomy Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. pp. 217- 242 ,(2004) , 10.1007/978-1-59259-776-5_11
Hans J Stricker, Sanjeev A Kaul, Ronald S Boris, Richard C Sarle, Radical prostatectomy: a single surgeon comparison of retropubic, perineal, and robotic approaches. Canadian Journal of Urology. ,vol. 14, pp. 3566- 3570 ,(2007)
J.W. Moul, D.G. Mcleod, R.L. Cornum, J. Brantley Thrasher, A comparison of radical retropubic with perineal prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer within the Uniformed Services Urology Research Group. BJUI. ,vol. 87, pp. 61- 65 ,(2001) , 10.1046/J.1464-410X.2001.00023.X
A. Tewari, A. Srivasatava, M. Menon, , A prospective comparison of radical retropubic and robot-assisted prostatectomy: experience in one institution BJU International. ,vol. 92, pp. 205- 210 ,(2003) , 10.1046/J.1464-410X.2003.04311.X
Stanisław Wroński, 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. Central European Journal of Urology 1\/2010. ,vol. 65, pp. 188- 194 ,(2012) , 10.5173/CEJU.2012.04.ART2
Sam B Bhayani, Christian P Pavlovich, Thomas S Hsu, Wendy Sullivan, L.i-Ming Su, Prospective comparison of short-term convalescence: laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy. Urology. ,vol. 61, pp. 612- 616 ,(2003) , 10.1016/S0090-4295(02)02416-0
Vipul R. Patel, Rahul Thaly, Ketul Shah, Robotic radical prostatectomy: outcomes of 500 cases. BJUI. ,vol. 99, pp. 1109- 1112 ,(2007) , 10.1111/J.1464-410X.2007.06762.X
Jeffrey M Holzbeierlein, Peter Langenstroer, H.J Porter II, J. Brantley Thrasher, Case selection and outcome of radical perineal prostatectomy in localized prostate cancer International Braz J Urol. ,vol. 29, pp. 291- 299 ,(2003) , 10.1590/S1677-55382003000400002
Timo A.J. Laurila, Wei Huang, David F. Jarrard, Robotic-assisted laparoscopic and radical retropubic prostatectomy generate similar positive margin rates in low and intermediate risk patients Urologic Oncology: Seminars and Original Investigations. ,vol. 27, pp. 529- 533 ,(2009) , 10.1016/J.UROLONC.2008.05.001
Michael L. Blute, David G. Bostwick, Erik J. Bergstralh, Jeff M. Slezak, Sandra K. Martin, Christopher L. Amling, Horst Zincke, Anatomic site-specific positive margins in organconfined prostate cancer and its impact on outcome after radical prostatectomy Urology. ,vol. 50, pp. 733- 739 ,(1997) , 10.1016/S0090-4295(97)00450-0