The Efficiency and Safety of Transperitoneal versus Extraperitoneal Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Single Center Experience with 1-year Follow-up.
机构:[1]Department of Urology/Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.四川大学华西医院[2]Department of Urology, Chongqing Three Gorges Central Hospital, Chongqing 404100, P.R. China.
Several studies have compared the short-term outcomes of extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (EP-RALP) and transperitoneal RALP (TP-RALP). The study was designed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of the two methods.
A prospective, non-randomized study was conceived. The demographics and operative outcomes of patients with prostate cancer undergoing RALP from September 2016 to January 2017 at our center were included.
A total of eighty-six patients were enrolled. Thirty-seven patients underwent EP-RALP, and forty-nine patients received TP-RALP. No significant difference was observed in age, body mass index, pathological T stage, pathological N stage, M stage, 2014 International Society of Urological Pathology group, comorbidities or American Society of Anesthesiologists score. A lower preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was detected in the EP-RALP group. No significant differences were observed in overall operation time, robotic console time, surgical margin status, postoperative hospitalization time, drop of hemoglobin and complications, except that patients with EP-RALP had a shorter time to first exsufflation after surgery than those with TP-RALP (41.35 vs. 51.80 h, P < .001). Postoperative PSA until 12 months was deemed comparable in both groups. Complete continence until 12 months after surgery was desirable but not significantly different between two groups (75.0% in EP- RALP vs. 86.7%. in TP-RALP, P = .179).
The long-term outcomes of EP-RALP were analogous to those of TP-RALP. Therefore, EP-RALP is an alternative approach for patients with localized prostate cancer.
基金:
Pillar Program from the Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province
(2018SZ0219), Key Project from the Health Commission of Sichuan Province (16ZD012).
语种:
外文
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2020]版:
大类|4 区医学
小类|4 区泌尿学与肾脏学
最新[2023]版:
大类|4 区医学
小类|4 区泌尿学与肾脏学
第一作者:
第一作者机构:[1]Department of Urology/Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.
共同第一作者:
通讯作者:
通讯机构:[1]Department of Urology/Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.[*1]Department of Urology/Institute of Urology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, P.R. China.
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
Yang Yubo,Liu Zhenhua,Guo Yaochuan,et al.The Efficiency and Safety of Transperitoneal versus Extraperitoneal Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Single Center Experience with 1-year Follow-up.[J].Urology journal.2020,17(5):480-485.doi:10.22037/uj.v16i7.5475.
APA:
Yang Yubo,Liu Zhenhua,Guo Yaochuan,Li Xiang,Liu Liangren...&Han Ping.(2020).The Efficiency and Safety of Transperitoneal versus Extraperitoneal Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Single Center Experience with 1-year Follow-up..Urology journal,17,(5)
MLA:
Yang Yubo,et al."The Efficiency and Safety of Transperitoneal versus Extraperitoneal Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy for Patients with Prostate Cancer: A Single Center Experience with 1-year Follow-up.".Urology journal 17..5(2020):480-485