Editorial Comment: Minimally Invasive Treatment of Prostate Cancer

Pertinent issues related to laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE

We describe the critical steps of the laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) technique and discuss how they impact upon the pertinent issues regarding prostate cancer surgery: blood loss, potency and continence.

RESULTS

A major advantage of LRP is the reduced operative blood loss. The precise placement of the dorsal vein complex stitch associated with the tamponading effect of the CO(2) pneumoperitoneum significantly decrease venous bleeding, which is the main source of blood loss during radical prostatectomy. At the Cleveland Clinic, the average blood loss of our first 100 patients was 322.5 ml, resulting in low transfusion rates. The continuous venous bleeding narrowed pelvic surgical field and poor visibility can adversely impact on nerve preservation during open radical prostatectomy. Laparoscopy, with its enhanced and magnified vision in a relatively bloodless field allows for excellent identification and handling of the neurovascular bundles. During open retropubic radical prostatectomy, the pubic bone may impair visibility and access to the urethral stump, and the surgeon must tie the knots relying on tactile sensation alone. Consequently, open prostatectomy is associated with a prolonged catheterization period of 2 - 3 weeks. Comparatively, during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy all sutures are meticulously placed and each is tied under complete visual control, resulting in a precise mucosa-to-mucosa approximation.

CONCLUSION

The laparoscopic approach may represent a reliable less invasive alternative to the conventional open approach. Despite the encouraging preliminary anatomical and functional outcomes, prospective randomized comparative trials are required to critically evaluate the role of laparoscopy for this sophisticated and delicate operation.