Ihsan-Tasci A, Simsek A, Dogukan-Torer M, Sokmen D, Sahin S, Bitkin A, Tugcu V. Oncologic results, functional outcomes, and complication rates of transperitoneal robotic assisted radical prostatectomy: single centre's experience.
Actas Urol Esp 2015;
39:70-7. [PMID:
24856651 DOI:
10.1016/j.acuro.2014.02.021]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/11/2013] [Revised: 12/31/2013] [Accepted: 02/02/2014] [Indexed: 10/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
We report the operative details and short term oncologic and functional outcome of the first 334 Robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy experiences for organ confined prostate cancer
METHODS
From August 2009 to December 2012, details of 334 consecutive patients were retrospectively analyzed. The analyzed parameters included: preoperative, per-operative characteristics, postoperative minor and major complications, positive surgical margin continence, potency, and biochemical progression at the follow-up period.
RESULTS
The classical extrafascial, interfascial, intrafascial and fascia sparing radical prostatectomy were performed in 31, 41, 200, and 62 cases, respectively. The mean operation time was 213.8±90.1minutes, and the mean estimated blood loss was 116.1±58.9cc during operation. A nerve-sparing procedure was performed bilaterally in 198 (59.3%) cases and unilaterally in 126 (37.7%) cases. The catheter was removed on postoperative day 9, 1±1.9. Surgical margin was positive in 36 (10.7%) patients. The overall, pT2, pT3a and pT3b PSM rates were 8 (2.4%), 12 (3.6%), 16 (4.8%) respectively and PSM and BCR rates were not statistically different among four approach (P>.05). At the follow-up period, the continence rates were 74.4%, 80.4%, 80.5%, and 96.7% (P<.001), and previously potent patients' potency rates were 64.3%, 66.6%, 68.1%, and 74.5% (P>.05), in classic extrafascial, interfascial, intrafascial, and fascia sparing intrafascial prostatectomy, respectively.
CONCLUSION
RARP is a safe and feasible technique in treatment of localized prostate cancer. Fascia sparing approach has better continence rate. This results need to be supported by new prospective, randomized studies.
Collapse