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

被引:37
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 28 条
[1]   Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Preliminary results [J].
Abbou, CC ;
Salomon, L ;
Hoznek, A ;
Antiphon, P ;
Cicco, A ;
Saint, F ;
Alame, W ;
Bellot, J ;
Chopin, DK .
UROLOGY, 2000, 55 (05) :630-633
[2]   Robot-assisted versus open radical prostatectomy: A comparison of one surgeon's outcomes [J].
Ahlering, TE ;
Woo, D ;
Eichel, L ;
Lee, DI ;
Edwards, R ;
Skarecky, DW .
UROLOGY, 2004, 63 (05) :819-822
[3]   Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy. [J].
Begg, CB ;
Riedel, ER ;
Bach, PB ;
Kattan, MW ;
Schrag, D ;
Warren, JL ;
Scardino, PT .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 346 (15) :1138-1144
[4]   Prospective comparison of short-term convalescence: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus open radical retropubic prostatectomy [J].
Bhayani, SB ;
Pavlovich, CP ;
Hsu, TS ;
Sullivan, W ;
Su, LM .
UROLOGY, 2003, 61 (03) :612-616
[5]   Extraperitoneal laparoscopic radical prostatectomy - Results after 50 cases [J].
Bollens, R ;
Vanden Bossche, M ;
Roumeguere, T ;
Damoun, A ;
Ekane, S ;
Hoffmann, P ;
Zlotta, AR ;
Schulman, CC .
EUROPEAN UROLOGY, 2001, 40 (01) :65-69
[6]   Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Preliminary pathologic evaluation [J].
Fromont, G ;
Guillonneau, B ;
Validire, P ;
Vallancien, G .
UROLOGY, 2002, 60 (04) :661-665
[7]   Overcoming the steep learning curve of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Single-surgeon experience [J].
Ghavamian, R ;
Schenk, G ;
Hoenig, DM ;
Williot, P ;
Melman, A .
JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY, 2004, 18 (06) :567-571
[8]   Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Technique [J].
Gill, IS ;
Zippe, CD .
UROLOGIC CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 2001, 28 (02) :423-+
[9]   Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: The montsouris experience [J].
Guillonneau, B ;
Vallancien, G .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2000, 163 (02) :418-422
[10]   Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: assessment after 550 procedures [J].
Guillonneau, B ;
Cathelineau, X ;
Doublet, JD ;
Baumert, H ;
Vallancien, G .
CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY, 2002, 43 (02) :123-133