Critical comparison of laparoscopic, robotic, and open radical prostatectomy: Techniques, outcomes, and cost

被引：25

作者：

Gettman M.T. ^{[1
]}

Blute M.L. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Gonda 7S, Rochester, MN 55905, 200 First Street, SW

来源：

Current Urology Reports | 2006年 / 7卷 / 3期

关键词：

Radical Prostatectomy; Localize Prostate Cancer; Radical Retropubic Prostatectomy; Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy; Continence Rate;

D O I：

10.1007/s11934-006-0021-1

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Radical prostatectomy has maintained paramount importance in prostate cancer management. Emerging alternative treatments are laparoscopic and robotic prostatectomy. Technical modifications have improved radical prostatectomy outcomes, yet surgery remains difficult to perform regardless of approach. Contemporary series have shown comparable outcomes with operative time, transfusion rates, analgesia, and length of catheterization. Open radical prostatectomy provides excellent long-term oncologic control, but sparse short-term data are available for laparoscopic and robotic prostatectomy. Favorable outcomes also have been reported for urinary control and sexual function, regardless of approach. Additional prospective data collection is needed to evaluate if minimally invasive approaches provide distinct advantages over open surgery. Copyright © 2006 by Current Science Inc.

引用

页码：193 / 199

页数：6

共 48 条

[1]

Humphreys M.R., Gettman M.T., Chow G.K., Et al., Minimally invasive radical prostatectomy, Mayo Clin Proc, 79, pp. 1169-1180, (2004)

[2]

Zincke H., Bergstralh E.J., Blute M.L., Et al., Radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: Long-term results of 1143 patients from a single institution, J Clin Oncol, 12, pp. 2254-2263, (1994)

[3]

Chang S.C., Cole E., Smith J.A., Et al., Safety reducing length of stay after open radical retropubic prostatectomy under the guidance of a clinical care pathway, Cancer, 104, pp. 747-751, (2005)

[4]

Sved P.D., Nieder A.M., Manoharan M., Et al., Evaluation of analgesic requirements and postoperative recovery after radical retropubic prostatectomy using long-acting spinal anesthesia, Urology, 65, pp. 509-512, (2005)

[5]

Herrell S.D., Smith Jr. J.A., Laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: What are the real advantages?, BJU Int, 95, pp. 3-9, (2005)

[6]

Webster T.M., Herrell S.D., Chang S.S., Et al., Robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy versus retropubic radical prostatectomy: A prospective assessment of postoperative pain, J Urol, 174, pp. 912-914, (2005)

[7]

Ellison L.M., Trock B.J., Poe N.R., Partin A.W., The effect of hospital volume on cancer control after radical prostatectomy, J Urol, 173, pp. 2094-2098, (2005)

[8]

Schuessler W.W., Schulam P.G., Clayman R.V., Kavoussi L.R., Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Initial short-term experience, Urology, 50, pp. 854-857, (1997)

[9]

Guillonneau B., El-Fettouh H., Baumert H., Et al., Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: Oncological evaluation after 1000 cases at Montsouris institute, J Urol, 169, pp. 1261-1266, (2003)

[10]

Anastasiadis A.G., Salomon L., Katz R., Et al., Radical retropubic versus laparoscopic prostatectomy: A prospective comparison of functional outcome, Urology, 62, pp. 292-297, (2003)

← 1 2 3 4 5 →