Journals / Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology / 2007 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 4

Radical perineal prostatectomy: Our experiences on 40 cases

Radikal perineal prostatektomi: 40 olguda deneyimlerimiz

Pages
398–404
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In order to be able to evaluate the functional and oncological results of this technique precisely, long-term and large scale comparative studies are needed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Introduction: We report our experience with 40 cases of localized prostate cancer treated with radical perineal prostatectomy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: From March 2003 to March 2007, we performed radical perineal prostatectomy in 40 localized prostate cancer cases.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In order to be able to evaluate the functional and oncological results of this technique precisely, long-term and large scale comparative studies are needed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2003 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Prostatektomi · Ürolojik cerrahi prosedürler · erkek

Abstract

Introduction: We report our experience with 40 cases of localized prostate cancer treated with radical perineal prostatectomy. Materials and Methods: From March 2003 to March 2007, we performed radical perineal prostatectomy in 40 localized prostate cancer cases. Cases were selected among patients which prostate volume <80 grams, Gleason Score &#8804;7, and PSA value <10 ng/ml. Recorded data of these patients were analyzed retrospectively. Results: The mean age of the patients was 61.2 years, the mean PSA value was 6.5 ng/ml and the mean Gleason score was 6. The average operation time was 132 (100-190) minutes and the mean blood loss was 370 (150-1000) ml. In one of 40 patients (2.5%) rectum was injured during surgery. The average hospitalization time was 2.5 days (1-6) and the mean transurethral catheterization time was 17 days (12-21). Of 40 patients, operation site was complicated with infection in two (5%) and neuropraxis developed in another two (5%). We performed nerve sparing technique in the last eight cases. Conclusion: RPP is a highly tolerable treatment modality for localized prostate cancer. It shortens the time of hospitalization, and is cost-effective. In order to be able to evaluate the functional and oncological results of this technique precisely, long-term and large scale comparative studies are needed.

Özet

Radical Perineal Prostatektomi (RPP) uyguladığımız 40 olguya ait deneyimlerimizi paylaşıyoruz. Mart 2003 ile Mart 2007 arasında organa sınırlı prostat kanserli 40 olguya RPP uyguladık. Bu hastalar prostatı <80 gr, Gleason skoru ≤7 ve PSA <10 ng/ml olan kişiler arasından seçildi. Veriler retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Hastaların ortalama yaşı 61,2 yıl, ortalama PSA değeri 6,5 ng/dl ve ortalama Gleason skoru 6 idi. Ortalama ameliyat süresi 132 dk (100-190dk), ortalama kan kaybı 370 ml (150-1000 ml) olarak hesaplandı. Bir hastada (%2,5) ameliyat sırasında rektal yaralanma gelişti. Hastanede yatış süresi ortalama 2,5 gün (1-6), kateterizasyon süresi ise 17 gün (12-21) idi. İki hastada (%5) yara yeri istenmeyen yan etkisi, 2 hastada (%5) ise nöropraksi gelişti. Son sekiz hastaya sinir koruyucu teknik uygulandı. RPP iyi tolere edilebilen bir tedavi yöntemidir. Hastanede kalış süresini kısaltmakta ve maliyeti azaltmaktadır. Bu tekniğin işlevsel ve onkolojik sonuçlarını ayrıntılı olarak değerlendirebilmek için uzun süreli, geniş ölçekli ve karşılaştırmalı çalışmalara ihtiyaç vardır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ALBAYRAK, S., HORUZ, R., GÖKTAŞ, C., CANGÜVEN, Ö., ÇETİNEL, C. (2007). Radical perineal prostatectomy: Our experiences on 40 cases. Türk Üroloji Dergisi/Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 4, 398–404. https://ajindex.com/articles/328325

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Weldon VE, Tavel FR: Potency sparing radical perineal prostatectomy: Anatomy, surgical technique, and initial results. J Urol, 140: 559-562, 1988
  2. Partin AW, Kattan MV, Subong E, et al: Combination of prostate-specific antigen, clinical stage, and Gleason score to predict pathological stage of localized prostate cancer. A multi-institutional update. JAMA, 277: 1445-1451, 1997
  3. Walsh PC, Lepor H, Eggleston JC: Radical prostatectomy with preservation of sexual function: Anatomical and pathological considerations. Prostate, 4: 473-485, 1983
  4. Walsh PC: Radical retropubic prostatectomy with reduced morbidity: An anatomic approach. NCI Monographs, 7: 133-137, 1988
  5. Weldon VE: Extended radical perineal prostatectomy: An anatomical and surgical study. J Urol, 139: 448, 1988
  6. Epstein JI, Carmichael M, Walsh PC: Adenocarcinoma of the prostate invading the seminal vesicle: Definition and relation of tumor volume, grade and margins of resection to prognosis. J Urol, 149: 1040, 1993
  7. Partin AW, Pound CR, Clemens JQ, et al: Serum PSA after anatomic radical prostatectomy. The Johns Hopkins experience after 10 years. Urol Clin N Amer, 20: 713,1993
  8. Byar DP, Mostofi FK: Carcinoma of the prostate: Prognostic evaluation of certain pathologic features in 208 radical prostatectomies. Cancer, 30:5, 1972
  9. Weldon VE, Tavel FR, Neuwirth H, et al: Patterns of positive specimen margins and detectable prostate-specific specific antigen after radical perineal prostatectomy. J Urol, (In press), 1995
  10. Stamey TA, Villers AA, McNeal JE, et al: Positive margins in radical prostatectomy: Importance of the apical dissection. J. Urol, 143: 1166, 1990
  11. Harris MJ: Radical perineal prostatectomy: Cost efficient, outcome effective, minimally invasive prostate cancer management. Eur Urol; 44: 303-308, 2003
  12. Rosenberg RD, Aird WC: Vascular Bed Specific Hemostasis And Hypercoagulable States (Review Articles) New Eng J Medicine 340: 20, 1555-1563, 1999
  13. Lance RS, Freidrichs PA, Kane C, et al: A comparison of Radical retropubic with perineal prostatectomy for localized prostate cancer within the Uniformed Services Urology Research Group. BJU Int; 87: 61-65, 2001
  14. Price DT, Vieweg J, Roland F, et al: Transient lower extremity neuropraxia associated with radical perineal prostatectomy: A complication of the exaggerated lithotomy position. J Urol; 160: 1376-1378, 1998
  15. Lu-Yao GL, Albertsen P, Warren J, et al: Effect of age and surgical approach on compli