Complications, urinary continence, and oncologic outcome of 1000 laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomies-experience at the Charité Hospital Berlin, Campus Mitte
- PMID: 16846677
- DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.06.023
Complications, urinary continence, and oncologic outcome of 1000 laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomies-experience at the Charité Hospital Berlin, Campus Mitte
Abstract
Objectives: Laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomy (LRP) is an alternative to open radical prostatectomy, but data based on large populations are not frequently available. This study was initiated to evaluate LRP with regard to complications, urinary continence, and oncologic outcome.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1000 consecutive patients with a mean age of 62 yr (SD+/-6 yr) and clinically localized prostate cancer. Between May 1999 and October 2004, all 1000 patients underwent LRP performed by eight urologists at one institution (Charité Hospital Berlin, Campus Mitte). The review procedure was based on complete patient documents (hospital stay, n=1000) and an interview by one physician. Histopathologic results, intraoperative and early and late complications, continence rate, and time to first PSA increase (n=952) were recorded. Erectile function was not part of this review. Twenty-two patients received neoadjuvant treatment for >2 mo.
Results: The median follow-up was 28.8 mo (range: 7.2 to 69.7). Intraoperative and early complications occurred in 11.8% of patients. In 77.6% the urethrovesical anastomosis tested by cystography at day 5 or 6 after LRP was intact; 76% used none or not more than one pad per 24h. The overall PSA-free survival was more than 90% for pT2, 80.3% for pT3a, and 72.4% for pT3b until July 2005. The mortality rate was 0.3%.
Conclusions: In the present series of 1000 patients, a specific disadvantage of LRP compared with the open approach, as reported in the literature, could not be shown. On the basis of short-term follow-up data, our retrospective evaluation confirms that LRP provides satisfactory results. We believe that laparoscopic radical prostatectomy can be the technique of choice in the future.
Comment in
-
To demonstrate the benefits of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy?Eur Urol. 2006 Dec;50(6):1160-1; discussion 1161-2. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.07.039. Epub 2006 Aug 7. Eur Urol. 2006. PMID: 16930817 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy - results of 200 consecutive cases in a Canadian medical institution.Can J Urol. 2004 Apr;11(2):2172-85. Can J Urol. 2004. PMID: 15182406
-
Oncological and functional results of antegrade radical retropubic prostatectomy for the treatment of clinically localised prostate cancer.Eur Urol. 2008 Mar;53(3):554-61. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.07.004. Epub 2007 Jul 16. Eur Urol. 2008. PMID: 17683854
-
Selective versus standard ligature of the deep venous complex during laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: effects on continence, blood loss, and margin status.Eur Urol. 2009 Jun;55(6):1377-83. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.02.009. Epub 2009 Feb 14. Eur Urol. 2009. PMID: 19243886 Clinical Trial.
-
Laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a critical analysis of surgical quality.Eur Urol. 2006 Apr;49(4):625-32. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2006.01.018. Epub 2006 Jan 31. Eur Urol. 2006. PMID: 16488072 Review.
-
Laparoscopic transperitoneal radical prostatectomy in renal transplant recipients: a review of the literature.BJU Int. 2010 Mar;105(6):844-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2009.08911.x. Epub 2009 Oct 5. BJU Int. 2010. PMID: 19804426 Review.
Cited by
-
Prevention and management of perioperative complications in laparoscopic and endoscopic radical prostatectomy.World J Urol. 2008 Dec;26(6):571-80. doi: 10.1007/s00345-008-0328-2. Epub 2008 Sep 10. World J Urol. 2008. PMID: 18781306 Review.
-
Complications of pelvic lymph node dissection for prostate cancer.Curr Urol Rep. 2011 Jun;12(3):203-8. doi: 10.1007/s11934-011-0179-z. Curr Urol Rep. 2011. PMID: 21394597 Review.
-
Clavien System Classification of Complications Developed following Laparoscopic Urological Operations Applied in our Clinic.Sisli Etfal Hastan Tip Bul. 2019 Aug 27;53(3):228-239. doi: 10.14744/SEMB.2018.98700. eCollection 2019. Sisli Etfal Hastan Tip Bul. 2019. PMID: 32377088 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of retropubic, laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy: who is the winner?World J Urol. 2018 Apr;36(4):609-621. doi: 10.1007/s00345-018-2174-1. Epub 2018 Jan 23. World J Urol. 2018. PMID: 29362896 Review.
-
Oncological and functional results of open, robot-assisted and laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: does surgical approach and surgical experience matter?World J Urol. 2007 Apr;25(2):149-60. doi: 10.1007/s00345-007-0164-9. Epub 2007 Mar 13. World J Urol. 2007. PMID: 17354014 Review.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials
Miscellaneous