Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Transversal approach via a bladder neck and prostate combined longitudinal incision versus standard approach of robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer: a retrospective analysis.
Shen, Zefan; Yao, CenChao; Bai, YuChen; Wang, YiFan; Zhang, Qi.
Afiliação
  • Shen Z; The Second Clinical Medical College, Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310000, China.
  • Yao C; Urology and Nephrology Center, Department of Urology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
  • Bai Y; Urology and Nephrology Center, Department of Urology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China.
  • Wang Y; Graduate Department, Bengbu Medical College, Bengbu, Anhui, 233000, China. YifanWang1116@163.com.
  • Zhang Q; Urology and Nephrology Center, Department of Urology, Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital, Affiliated People's Hospital, Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, 310014, China. clinic@126.com.
BMC Cancer ; 24(1): 313, 2024 Mar 06.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38448829
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Transversal approach for robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy via a bladder neck and prostate combined longitudinal incision (L-RALP) is a novel surgical method for patients with respectable prostate cancer.

METHODS:

There were 669 patients with prostate cancer underwent L-RALP or S-RALP which identified from April 2016 to April 2020. The perioperative outcomes, Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite for Clinical Practice (EPIC-CP) scores, sexual function and urinary control ability were included and compared between two groups.

RESULTS:

In the 669 patients, 277 of them were included into the final analysis. 151 patients received S-RALP and 126 received L-RALP. Baseline features were balanced. Patients in the S-RALP group had significantly shorter average surgical time (135.93 vs 150.04 min; p < 0.001) than those in L-RALP group. Intraoperative bleeding volume, early postoperative complications rates, postoperative catheter removal time and hospital stays were comparable between two groups. There was no difference in biochemical recurrence at 3, 6, 12 and 18 months of follow-up. Of note, the urinary control function recovers of patients in the L-RALP group was significantly better than those in the S-RALP group. Moreover, patients in the L-RALP group had much better results of EPIC-CP (including urinary control and total score) than those in the S-RALP group at 6 week and 3, 6, 12 and 18 months.

CONCLUSIONS:

Both S-RALP and L-RALP were safe and effective with similar long-term clinical outcomes in patients with respectable prostate cancer. Patients received L-RALP had significantly better postoperative outcomes including urinary control, and recovery period.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos / Ferida Cirúrgica Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Robóticos / Ferida Cirúrgica Limite: Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2024 Tipo de documento: Article