Technical evolution of laparoscopic radical prostatectorny after 450 cases

Background and Purpose: In 1998, laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with primary access to the seminal vesicles was introduced. In 1999, we developed a laparoscopic technique similar to the classic retropubic radical prostatectomy. We focus here on the continuous technical evolution of our technique. Patients and Methods: From March 1999 to May 2002, we performed 450 laparoscopic radical prostatectomies. All important data of the patients; data concerning the performance of the procedure, including technical modifications, conversion, reintervention, and complication rate; as well as follow-up information were documented contemporaneously. The patients were divided into three groups of 150 individuals each in order to analyze the influence of the technical evolution of the procedure. Additionally, we studied the transferability of our technique, comparing the learning curves of the three surgeons involved in the program. Results: The technical modifications included the routine use of a voice-controlled robot (AESOP) for the camera, exposure of the apex with 120degrees retracting forceps, a free-hand suturing technique instead of the Endo-stitch device for the dorsal vein complex, 5-mm clipping instead of bipolar coagulation for the nerve-sparing technique, initial 6 o' clock suturing of the urethra before complete division, control of the prostatic pedicles by use of 12-mm Hemo-lok clips instead of the Ultracision or Endo-GIA, the bladder neck-sparing technique in cases of T-1c and T-2a tumors, and interrupted instead of continuous sutures for the vesicourethral anastomosis. All these modifications resulted in a significant decrease in operating time and the rates of transfusion, open conversion, and reintervention. The introduction of the nerve-sparing technique increased the number of tumor-positive margins. The mean operating time of the third surgeon was significantly less than that of the first surgeon, but the transfusion, conversion, and reintervention rates did not differ significantly among the surgeons. Conclusions: Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy has undergone continuous technical evolution resulting in a significant improvement of the operative results. Although we were able to demonstrate the transferability of this difficult prodedure, we feel that it should be performed only at centers of expertise.